I received an email from a friend. He heard about what happened to a particular player and asked me if I thought it was legal. I’ll share what was reported, but keep in mind that I don’t know who it happened to, the skill of the player, or even in what state the casino is located. All of this information could affect my answer, but there are still interesting features to discuss.
A player, I’ll call him Joe, was playing loose video poker and the casino had a promotion giving a large point multiplier. The points were good for free play only and the multiplying of the points would happen sometime after the day of the play. After the promotion started, the casino figured out that players pounding their loosest games, which included Joe, had a sizeable advantage over the casino. The casino 86’d some of these players and did not let them redeem any of their multiplied points — claiming that the players who were playing these machines so hard during the promotion were indulging in a “free play scam.”
Joe took it to gaming, claiming he was only playing a promotion that the casino offered. Gaming decided in favor of the casino — but didn’t explain to Joe why. Joe would not have played this game without the multiplier, so was stuck with playing a negative game. The friend who sent me the story told me he thought that casinos could 86 players, but he thought they had to pay out accumulated free play.
I have several comments on this.
- I often wish our Gambling with an Edge podcast was still happening, and this is one of those times. I would love to put this question to Bob Nersessian. While I have considerable experience and some expertise, Bob Nersessian is an attorney who specializes in player disputes with casinos. I’m sure he would ask where this happened because rules differ by jurisdiction.
- I don’t know whether this was a tribal casino or not. If so, all bets are off. Tribes have considerable discretion in enforcing policies however they see fit. It’s not impossible to sue and win in a situation involving a tribal casino, but it’s much tricker.
- I assume Joe represented himself when he went to gaming. Being represented by an attorney can improve your chances for success, but attorneys don’t work for free. I don’t know how much money was involved here. If it was a few hundred dollars, lawyers wouldn’t be interested in suing on a 1/3 contingency basis. If we’re talking $25,000 or more, attorneys will probably talk to you. (While I respect Nersessian and believe he’s handled these cases successfully in the past, I don’t speak for him. I don’t know Nersessian’s minimum amount, whether he has time for another case, or even if he is licensed in the jurisdiction where this took place.)
- There have been numerous cases through the years where a casino manager made a big mistake designing a promotion — and when players jumped all over it, chose to blame the players. This strikes me as another one of these cases. Some of these casino managers believe that players who play heavily on a promotion that was juicier than the promotion-designer imagined are actually scum and cheating the casino. Hence the accusation of “free play scam.” To beat such an accusation, you need to have all the literature describing the promotion and be able to cross examine whoever is calling it a scam. A gaming representative isn’t going to do this. He/she is going take Joe’s statement, take the casino representative’s statement, and make some sort of judgment. Unless Joe demanded a hearing, whether he represented himself or had an attorney do it, he would have no chance to cross examine the casino representative.
- I’m most familiar with the gaming rules in Nevada, as that’s where I’ve played the most and heard about more disputes than I have in any other place. Generally speaking, if the casino owes you money in a case such as this, unless they are successfully making a case of fraud, you’ll get your money eventually. I’ve seen it where you can collect small amounts (say $25 per day) of this money, but if you go through the rigamarole, you’ll get your money. If they 86 you, as they did with Joe, they owe him the money when they kick him out because he’s not allowed to go in and collect it.
- In a somewhat similar situation where I was on the wrong end of a gaming ruling, the casino only awarded free play for accumulated points — not cash. Since I was 86’d I was not allowed to go in and play off that free play. So sorry. if the casino offered cash back rather than free play, I might have been able to collect.
- If a casino has published rules where it promises to deliver such and such, sometime Gaming will force them to honor that during a hearing. Most rules, therefore, have language in it where the casino reserves all rights and is the sole arbiter of disputes. Sometimes Gaming will honor this disclaimer. Sometimes not.
- Casino points and comp dollars can sometimes be confiscated — depending on more factors than I can cogently outline. Without knowing more details than I have, it’s possible that the casino was in the right. They were jerks about it, but within their rights. The multiplied points had not been given to Joe when he was 86’d — so it’s possible he’s not going to get them.
- Joe has a few options. The ruling in the casino’s favor can sometimes be appealed for a certain period of time. If that time has not elapsed, this is one option. Another option is in the court of public opinion. If what the casino did can be publicized, often the casino will settle in order to shut you up. Sometimes newspapers and/or television stations will publicize it if they are convinced the casino was in the wrong. One problem with this is that Joe’s name will be in this publicity and other casinos in the area may learn more about Joe than he wants them to know. Other casinos may well decide that Joe is too expert or too much of a troublemaker for their taste — and not allow Joe to play in their establishments. While it is legal for Joe to try to embarrass the casino for its high-handed actions, it’s also legal for other casinos to restrict Joe simply by saying, “He’s too good for us.”
- In the above situation, if the casino happens to be a big advertiser with whatever media you’d like to use to help you sway public opinion, media executives are often understandably cautious with biting the hand that feeds them.
In similar cases, where the combination of earned free play and my winning has put me in position where I think it’s at least possible the casino will take some action I don’t like against me, I continually download as much money as I can, as I go. That way, when they stop me, they will not owe me a lot of money. If a casino owes me $5,000 when they pull the plug, and it was possible to retrieve that beforehand and I didn’t, this is arguably my own fault. In this particular case this might not have been possible, but in other cases it has been. In this particular case, where the additional free play would not be loaded until sometime in the future, Joe couldn’t possibly have redeemed points that hadn’t been loaded on his account yet.
This is, as always, fascinating stuff. My superior half is a stickler for exhausting cashback and points and free play as we go; I’m a hoarder. Time and again, she has been proven to be correct. You’ve gotta collect it, so to speak, while the bank is open.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say this sounds like a Native American place. I hope I’m correct, because it bodes not well if it wasn’t. I’ve read a few of the Native American tribal newsletters, and my conclusion is that tribes basically have the ability to do whatever they want to you whenever they want. And tribal councils have the ability to censor any tribal member arguing otherwise. You are on foreign soil, and their rules are whatever they deem them to be.
The use of the word “scam” is interesting. The late Alan Mendelson, an ABC reporter who ran a casino/betting forum, always argued that “scam” has a specific legal definition, and if you accuse someone of engaging in a scam that is not illegal, you can be sued into oblivion because technically you have accused that person of an illegal act. The fact the word “scam” was inserted, whether sloppily or by design, suggests Native American again, because they make the law. Non-Native American should not use the word “scam” so blithely.
I never know what to do when a casino/bookmaker screws up and creates an obvious profit opportunity. One of the offshores offered a team that should have been 50-1 to win the NCAA tournament at 500-1. Extra zero — ooops. I saw it immediately and made a modest wager (a third of the limit). The wager held for about 10 days, then that team won a high-profile game, other people jumped on the odds, probably slamming the max, and the sports book caught their mistake and vetoed all futures on that team. Fair? Nope, but like Native American casinos, offshore books are their own law.
If this was not Native American, it’s pretty chilling. What’s to prevent any management screw-up from being labeled a “scam?” Casinos are allowed to retrospectively change their rules? Bad stuff.
Really enjoyed reading this and Robert’s take on this.
I too believe this is probably a native American casino.
Almost 35 years ago, I was doing some contract work for a large tribal casino/hotel
in New Mexico. I had both my contract and the hotel’s contract covering this job.
My contract was an AFL-CIO union document. Halfway thru the job, the tribe decided
to cancel my work for no reason. My union attorneys in New York looked into the matter for me.
No luck….absolutely no luck. The lawyers told me (my young naive self) that the Indians were a
sovereign nation and can do whatever they want, contracts or not. I was bummed and disillusioned.
My faith in all things good was no more and I became the black cloud I am today…..ha.
90% chance it was a tribal casino, where customers have little rights. It never ceases to amaze me why anyone would patronize those places.