I submit a copy of correspondence I have sent to my member of parliament and other media bodies.
I would like to draw your attention to the practice of online bookmakers welcome bonuses for new customers. It would appear that the terms and conditions of these bonuses actually allow them to steal a client’s money should that client change their mind and wish to close the account.
All bookmakers have wagering commitments in the terms and conditions of their bonus awards whereby the players has to wager many times the bonus amount in ‘rollovers’ to be able to withdraw it. I don’t have a problem with this as, despite their claims, bookmakers never give something for nothing and they ensure the bonus wagering commitments are so high that it’s unlikely most players will roll over the bonus enough times before losing it in order to be able to withdraw it. However the scandal is that some of them do not allow the player to withdraw their original stake either while ever bonus conditions exist. This should not be allowed as it is the client’s money and not the bookmakers.
On 10 October 2014 I joined Virgin Games and deposited £100. I was awarded an extra £200 welcome bonus, making my total balance £300. I didn’t really want the bonus as I was aware that all online bookmakers have extremely high wagering commitments, however it appeared much easier to accept the bonus than to decline it, which is what the bookmakers want you to do; similarly it is always easier to make a deposit than a withdrawal - deposits are instant, withdrawals always have a ‘pending’ period of anything up to several days at weekends, during which time they hope the player changes their mind and cancels the withdrawal.
After playing some slot games with Virgin Games I was actually briefly in profit and had increased the £300, £100 of which was my own money from my initial deposit, to £370. However when I came to try to withdraw anything I was disappointed to see that not only did I have to wager another £350+ but my wagering commitments thus far for the terms and conditions amounted to less than 10%. I gambled some more and sure enough began to lose. Despite losing over £200 when I checked the withdrawal situation it appeared to have changed very little. I still needed to gamble another £340+ and had only met 11% of the wagering requirements needed.
It was at this point, when I still had my original £100 in the account, that I decided to close the account and self exclude as I have had a long standing addiction to online slots and Virgin Games were the last bookmaker I am not self excluded from. At least if I closed the account and self exclude I will get my original stake back, or so I thought.
Virgin Games were obliging when it cam to closing my account and excluding me at my request however they refused to give me my £100 stake back, citing ‘terms and conditions.’ I insisted this was my money and as I was no longer a client and they were obliged to return the deposit. The advisor was adamant that this couldn’t be done. I asked to be referred up their hierarchy and I was later duly contacted by someone who was presumably senior. However this person said the same, that owing to the terms and conditions which had to be applied to all customers they couldn’t return my original deposit.
It was explained that the bonus conditions would lapse after thirty days and any profit could then be withdrawn. However this would not apply in my case as not only was I not in profit as I hadn’t fulfilled the wagering commitments, but I was now self-excluded so wouldn’t be able to play. I asked if it was possible to change the self exclusion and at least allow me to try to meet the wagering commitments and have a chance of winning and was told this wasn’t possible as self exclusions cannot be reversed. This, as far as I am concerned is tantamount to Virgin Games stealing my deposit as they refuse to return it or to even allow me to play with it.
It transpires that the original deposit is used first in any wager, and the bonus is not wagered until the original stake is lost, thereby meaning that anything left will not be allowed to be withdrawn until the wagering commitments have been met. It would be fairer if this was the other way around, and players should always be allowed to withdraw their original stake which is, after all, their own money.
It also transpires that wagering commitments vary wildly between different games and slots games contribute the lowest towards this, hence despite the amount of times I played and the money I lost having little impact on my wagering commitments. This is buried deep within the terms and conditions. A £10 stake on slot games only contributes 50 pence towards the wagering commitments which meant that I would have had to stake in the region of £7000 in order to achieve the £350 wagering commitments required to be able to begin to withdraw. This is a ridiculously high wagering requirement. Furthermore roulette only contributes 12p for a £10 stake towards meeting the requirements whilst blackjack contributes nothing; only bingo contributes £10 for a £10 stake. This is explained in the terms and conditions, but isn’t something most new players would be aware of when seduced by the bonus banner headlines on the welcome page.
To summarise I believe legislation needs introducing regarding online bookmakers terms and conditions.
1. Bookmakers should not be allowed to withhold a client’s original deposit until wagering commitments have been met. This is the client’s money and not the bookmakers and the terms and conditions amount to little more than licensed robbery.
2. If a player closes an account for whatever reason any part of their original deposit remaining should be returned Under the present terms and conditions the deposit is used first, thereby leaving the bonus in the account and allowing bookmakers to withhold it as ‘their money.’ The terms and conditions must be amended so that the bonus is staked before the deposit.
3. The rollover amounts of twenty to thirty five times the stake are far too high and unfair. On no game should the wagering requirements be higher than ten times.
4. It should be made clearer that the wagering commitments vary so much between different games.
5. The terms and conditions should be more prominent. As present the bonuses are advertised in colourful banner headlines, suggesting bookmakers are giving you free money, whilst there is a small asterisk linking to terms and conditions. Very few new players will read these.
Returning to point one, the most important of these points, some bookmakers do allow players to withdraw their original stake whilst a bonus is in operation and all bookmakers should be compelled by law to allow this. I am not asking for access to the bookmakers money, just my own. It appears that the present terms and conditions simply allow them to steal a client’s money and not return it even after they are no longer a client.
I await your response and hope that action can be taken on this matter.
I would like to draw your attention to the practice of online bookmakers welcome bonuses for new customers. It would appear that the terms and conditions of these bonuses actually allow them to steal a client’s money should that client change their mind and wish to close the account.
All bookmakers have wagering commitments in the terms and conditions of their bonus awards whereby the players has to wager many times the bonus amount in ‘rollovers’ to be able to withdraw it. I don’t have a problem with this as, despite their claims, bookmakers never give something for nothing and they ensure the bonus wagering commitments are so high that it’s unlikely most players will roll over the bonus enough times before losing it in order to be able to withdraw it. However the scandal is that some of them do not allow the player to withdraw their original stake either while ever bonus conditions exist. This should not be allowed as it is the client’s money and not the bookmakers.
On 10 October 2014 I joined Virgin Games and deposited £100. I was awarded an extra £200 welcome bonus, making my total balance £300. I didn’t really want the bonus as I was aware that all online bookmakers have extremely high wagering commitments, however it appeared much easier to accept the bonus than to decline it, which is what the bookmakers want you to do; similarly it is always easier to make a deposit than a withdrawal - deposits are instant, withdrawals always have a ‘pending’ period of anything up to several days at weekends, during which time they hope the player changes their mind and cancels the withdrawal.
After playing some slot games with Virgin Games I was actually briefly in profit and had increased the £300, £100 of which was my own money from my initial deposit, to £370. However when I came to try to withdraw anything I was disappointed to see that not only did I have to wager another £350+ but my wagering commitments thus far for the terms and conditions amounted to less than 10%. I gambled some more and sure enough began to lose. Despite losing over £200 when I checked the withdrawal situation it appeared to have changed very little. I still needed to gamble another £340+ and had only met 11% of the wagering requirements needed.
It was at this point, when I still had my original £100 in the account, that I decided to close the account and self exclude as I have had a long standing addiction to online slots and Virgin Games were the last bookmaker I am not self excluded from. At least if I closed the account and self exclude I will get my original stake back, or so I thought.
Virgin Games were obliging when it cam to closing my account and excluding me at my request however they refused to give me my £100 stake back, citing ‘terms and conditions.’ I insisted this was my money and as I was no longer a client and they were obliged to return the deposit. The advisor was adamant that this couldn’t be done. I asked to be referred up their hierarchy and I was later duly contacted by someone who was presumably senior. However this person said the same, that owing to the terms and conditions which had to be applied to all customers they couldn’t return my original deposit.
It was explained that the bonus conditions would lapse after thirty days and any profit could then be withdrawn. However this would not apply in my case as not only was I not in profit as I hadn’t fulfilled the wagering commitments, but I was now self-excluded so wouldn’t be able to play. I asked if it was possible to change the self exclusion and at least allow me to try to meet the wagering commitments and have a chance of winning and was told this wasn’t possible as self exclusions cannot be reversed. This, as far as I am concerned is tantamount to Virgin Games stealing my deposit as they refuse to return it or to even allow me to play with it.
It transpires that the original deposit is used first in any wager, and the bonus is not wagered until the original stake is lost, thereby meaning that anything left will not be allowed to be withdrawn until the wagering commitments have been met. It would be fairer if this was the other way around, and players should always be allowed to withdraw their original stake which is, after all, their own money.
It also transpires that wagering commitments vary wildly between different games and slots games contribute the lowest towards this, hence despite the amount of times I played and the money I lost having little impact on my wagering commitments. This is buried deep within the terms and conditions. A £10 stake on slot games only contributes 50 pence towards the wagering commitments which meant that I would have had to stake in the region of £7000 in order to achieve the £350 wagering commitments required to be able to begin to withdraw. This is a ridiculously high wagering requirement. Furthermore roulette only contributes 12p for a £10 stake towards meeting the requirements whilst blackjack contributes nothing; only bingo contributes £10 for a £10 stake. This is explained in the terms and conditions, but isn’t something most new players would be aware of when seduced by the bonus banner headlines on the welcome page.
To summarise I believe legislation needs introducing regarding online bookmakers terms and conditions.
1. Bookmakers should not be allowed to withhold a client’s original deposit until wagering commitments have been met. This is the client’s money and not the bookmakers and the terms and conditions amount to little more than licensed robbery.
2. If a player closes an account for whatever reason any part of their original deposit remaining should be returned Under the present terms and conditions the deposit is used first, thereby leaving the bonus in the account and allowing bookmakers to withhold it as ‘their money.’ The terms and conditions must be amended so that the bonus is staked before the deposit.
3. The rollover amounts of twenty to thirty five times the stake are far too high and unfair. On no game should the wagering requirements be higher than ten times.
4. It should be made clearer that the wagering commitments vary so much between different games.
5. The terms and conditions should be more prominent. As present the bonuses are advertised in colourful banner headlines, suggesting bookmakers are giving you free money, whilst there is a small asterisk linking to terms and conditions. Very few new players will read these.
Returning to point one, the most important of these points, some bookmakers do allow players to withdraw their original stake whilst a bonus is in operation and all bookmakers should be compelled by law to allow this. I am not asking for access to the bookmakers money, just my own. It appears that the present terms and conditions simply allow them to steal a client’s money and not return it even after they are no longer a client.
I await your response and hope that action can be taken on this matter.
