pinnit2015

That’s why I find some sub quid bets more profitable than high. I was playing Moon Princess and it was firing 200x and 250x q few time last night on 40p. When I went to two quid it was like a different game. Even the feel of it was like someone flipped the switch. No one will ever convince me that a game is as loose with big bets as it is with low.

‘‘Twas the elephant. Been ages since I played it. When it was first out I’d a few good hits. Doa/wild rockets and that are the only Netents worth playing these days IMO

Sports betting is legal now there though: though iv heard banks are closing accounts that have casino related activity. It’s like the dark ages

To digress - makes you wonder that if Estonia can have a licensing body, why can't Australia (actually I lie - we all know that a government seeks to ban something because it simply has not thought of how it's going to tax it ) I've never even heard of the EMTA so not sure what their policies/cultures/reputation is/are like. I'm always skeptical about why certain places would opt for certain licences and not, say MGA.

Yeah...been on the cards for a while though. I loved/love the MG ones. Might need to have a 2 minute silence once Viper hangs up it's boots in the near future, as well. On a related-ish note: BTG will be releasing their games on the QuickFire platform i think, so Bonanza can be coming to a Bingo site near you

Back in 2004 I was one of the lucky ones to pick Greece as outsider for Euros. Can’t remember replying ‘a vision came to me in my sleep and/or UEFA have rigged it’ when I collected :-)

Not in Sportsbetting for me either - i know there have been cases, moreso with slots, whereby casinos say that certain plays (bet sizes/games) were very similar to others.

What's weird is that phoned her to basically do a pop quiz as to her bets...Would they do this if Land Based? Probably not Think Coco's right - sounds like they've possibly misinterpreted, maybe your mums gave the impression she's administering an a/c on your behalf- which may account for why they offered an amount. I've no reason to doubt the OP's version and if i was to look at all that, providing there's nothing else in the background, I'd say it's a ridiculous interpretation of the t's and c's. If it was a large amount and saw a courtroom I'd hazard a guess it'd be found in the OP's favour. Someone better tell the Channel 4 Horse Racing tipsters that they'd putting peoples money at risk

Hopefully you never got her to place any bets because your role in the sportsbook industry prohibits you? To be fair OP there's a difference in scale to asking for a one off tip or casual conversation, to asking someone to specifically pick x,y,z with a relatively high balance.... That's what makes it all a bit grey for me.

I don't think it's that obviously a case of no to be honest. The generic term is you register to play on your own behalf and not on someone else's. Providing tips does not in itself constitute acting as an agent for another. If that was the case, half of the UK public who bet at the Grand National would have their winnings confiscated The question is however probably one of degree - does the OP's heavy involvement mean that the bets are being placed on his behalf. To be fair - if the OP's mum was having regular cash sent to her and was placing bets, then yes, absolutely. But, if he 'tipped' 7500 worth of bets then you could argue he is the one betting. The again, a tenner? Eek - who knows. And on their behalf means that the other person (in this case the OP) would be the recipient of the benefit, not the mum. It's a tricky one. Probably the only way to really know would be if everyone's financials were looked at to see who the real beneficial owner/better was. Take Australia and their bans - if i set up an account and told people there that if they paid me I'd play slots under my name as they couldn't. That's probably the most obvious on the scale. This, not not much - when is a tip a tip and when is it acting as an agent...i don't know. Personally - it's a massive jump from 'my son helped me pick some teams' to her opening an account on his behalf. Maybe there were other factors - i don't know.

See above

642 X low rolling. One of the few good Netents

Grr...676X but it was a good symbol without one 4 of kind but on the plus - 13 retriggers (starting point is 10 free spins) So booo..

Maybe it's to tell his bank/casino account to go 'into the black' A Red Lion (which incidentally is a pub chain here) would just be asking for trouble

As for Trump - I'm sure he'll get a nice welcome when he comes to Scotland Never mind the Mexican wall - he'll be passing over Hadrians Free opticians, free health care, a third tax band and a liberal immigration policy - he'll have a hairy canary

Personally I wouldn't go into Roulette with just a 20 - consider some tables are minimum 1 euro/pound etc, it'll be gone in no time. I used to play more table games than i used to - quite frankly slots have ruined it for me - Eg. other day put a pound on a game got 1000 times my bet back (yes, i know, it's not likely every session). Then when you go to the tables you have a probability of just under 50% of betting red/black, odd/even all for basically x2. I still tend to play them when i'm up on slots and they can yield some nice returns - i normally skim 10% off my withdrawals and head to roulette/blackjack. But they're more of a bonus - i've never woke up thinking 'what a great session'. I have with slots. Afi's right - the odds aren't 50-50, but under.

That's the bit i don't get re the segregation - the basic level is basically there is no segregation as it'll possibly get sucked into the wind up process, so how this can be tagged as offering security is beyond me. Then the top level? Well, then UKGC basically say that even if have that it's no guarantee Which begs the q - if so, what's the point?

Had a quick look - Bookee are under the EveryMatrix Licence and Mint - FSB? But FSB's white labels are Bookee and Mint?

White labels? - I don't know if this makes a difference eg. MT Securetrade had loads of white labels and SE could be applied on a casino to casino basis I think so you could be excluded at one but not the other. Unclear about how this works if i'm honest. Recently for example they took the decision to apply across all MT sites but that was a business decision, not a compliance one. Basically - if both the same licence, your bets should be void. The UKGC aren't overtly clear about this in their regulations IMO - but void would be restoring the player to the position he was at should the bets not have been accepted (which means withdrawals - deposits). When i say not clear - they say bets should be void. Arguable if they need to elaborate a bit more on sister sites or whereby a casino takes over the SE list of another in a takeover etc. Their judgements have been pretty clear that this should happen as well. Read the Social Responsibility Code of the LCCP (section 3 IIRC) Even though UKGC stand over the SR Code they do not deal with SE issues on an individual basis. Basically they kick it to an ADR and Valdes here can elaborate from there 300 in 20 mins? Were you doing fiver spins? *again, the above is not my personal view of if the money should be returned/wider issues but from a compliance point of view*

If they continued to trade and had no intention of meeting their obligations I'm sure a visit for wrongful/fraudulent trading would outweigh one from the UKGC Interestingly the 'presenter' to strike off the Companies House Register was brought by Novomatic If it was a Members Vol Liquidation then they were solvent anyhow = no issue with paying.

When they started out they were really quick IIRC - fast forward some years and wow - 2 weeks for some. There was even a complaint where they refused to pay someone as the person was having trouble getting the KYC documents and they basically said 'it's taking too long'

Well it depends what level of segregation of funds protection they have - there are 3 levels but most casinos have basic - which basically means no protection. Your funds are seen as the companies so may get swallowed up to pay creditors etc It's certainly not like the Govt and savings accounts protection etc. The site said it was down for maintenance and then changed to out of business: which is a bit weird. The notice for desolving was lodged with Companies House as far back as March/April-18 so they kept that on the down low AFIK they'll honour all pending payments or amounts in the account - as your's was refused you may find it goes to your home in the form of a cheque.

Well, given their history of super delayed payments, the warning signs were there. Dr V has closed it's doors. Tis a shame - one of the last casinos who seemed to target low rollers for regular, daily offers etc. 12-18 months ago they just seemed to hit the skids. RIP Dr V - you should have been better Follows quick on Breakout casino lasting less than 8 months. Wonder is the gambling bubble starting to burst

I used to play more when they were the old littlewoods i think? One of my first forays into casinos - i remember thinking 20x was a good win... I don't really play there unless it;s freebies or an offer - they usually have really low wagering and i've made wagering on the last few offered. Their games play OK actually - relatively loose - KOI Princess has threw a few 500 plus X wins my way. But as it's Netent/IGT etc I'm not that keen Plus - no search function for games - WTF

I've a love/hate relationship with Casumo - I tend to go through very streaky winning spells with them. That's the only reason i still play there because they've gone from being quite customer centric to now, well, not. They had the cheeky to tell me they were awarding loyalty with 10 free spins at 10p each. Yeah, thanks. Go and get 10 burner phones and , if you don't win on the reels, you've got the start of a Pablo Escobar/Money Laundering career