Sportsbook news results for the search term: wagerhub
07.29.2011 (07:08 PM CST)
BetGrizzly (unrated) is soliciting player deposits advertising 100% signup bonuses. BetGrizzly is being pushed by former WagerHub (SBR rating D-) and WagerWeb (SBR rating D-) employee "Chuck". Chuck's position is listed as customer service advisor in the BetGrizzly homepage. An SBRforum user reports that a telephone sales pitch was made to him by Chuck, and that originally the plan was to bring on players to off-line domain "BetChuck.com". BetChuck has been suspended by its host for nonpayment.
Players are advised to use extreme caution when choosing to play with newly established sportsbooks. High bonuses from unknown sportsbooks can often lead to player headache come withdrawal time. SBR will update this report as more information is learned about BetGrizzly.com.
06.28.2010 (06:32 PM CST)
WagerHub (SBR rating D-) has gone off-line. The homepage displays a logo redirecting to ProBets.com (SBR rating D-), a member of the Sportsbook.com Group. WagerHub provided no notice to players of the upcoming takeover. WagerHub came under fire at SBRforum for their decision to publicly justify confiscating $1900 in player winnings in a sportsbook dispute. WagerHub then nullified $1400 in winnings from the player who submit an April 26th sportsbook complaint. SBR contacted ProBets and was told that the sportsbook was not yet prepared to release an official statement regarding the acquisition. WagerHub players that have problems logging into ProBets or wish to comment on their balance status and ability to withdraw funds are asked to submit sportsbook assistance forms. | WagerHub Forum Discussion
ProBets: [quote]ProBets.com has taken over all customers from WagerHub. All the information will be showed on the customer's account. Unfortunately we cannot make any official statement yet, but the customers can contact us at anytime.[/quote]
04.26.2010 (04:37 PM CST)
A WagerHub (SBR rating D-) slow-pay complaint has been reported. A player alleges that he initiated a withdrawal of $1400 in December of 2009 and has yet to receive payment. WagerHub was most recently reported on SportsbookReview for their decision to confiscate $1900 in player winnings. WagerHub is on the SBR sportsbook blacklist as an outfit to avoid.
04.20.2010 (12:41 PM CST)
WagerHub (SBR rating D-) is standing by its decision to confiscate $1900 in player winnings. A player deposited $500 on January 14th for a 56% freeplay and 44% cash bonus; he increased his balance to $8900 and in the process completed his 10X rollover. His account was then suspended by WagerHub for being non-recreational. WagerHub decided to pay only 80% of the player's balance stating that bonuses were only intended to be accepted by recreational players. SBR considers the action theft. SBR readers discuss WagerHub confiscation.
04.16.2010 (12:51 PM CST)
The WagerHub (SBR rating D-) player who was the subject of SBR's March 3rd sportsbook complaint had $1900 in winnings confiscated by WagerHub. Initially the player's account was frozen due to non-recreational play, then WagerHub came forward with allegations that his account was accessed from IP's outside of his geographic location. The player was able to reasonably prove that his account was never controlled by a third party.
The player deposited $500 on January 14th in exchange for a 44% cash bonus and 56% freeplay bonus. The total rollover for the 100% promotion was 10X. When his account was suspended with a balance of $8900, rollover was complete. WagerHub removed $1900 in funds stating that bonuses could not be redeemed by non-recreational players. WagerHub agreed only to pay $5600 to the player. $300 was used in withdrawal fees, and the remaining $1100 was played and lost pending his withdrawal. SBR considers the action of removing winnings from an account that have already been rolled over theft.
03.03.2010 (05:56 PM CST)
A WagerHub (SBR rating D-) complaint has been filed. The player in question was the subject of SBR's 2/1 and 2/2 report, which chronicled WagerHub freezing the player's account balance which held $8200 due to "nonrecreational play". No rules were violated, yet WagerHub informed the player his $500 deposit would be refunded and winnings nullified. On 2/2 SBR reported that WagerHub agreed to pay the player in full.
WagerHub sent two payments to the player, for $2500 and $2000. After the player confirmed receiving $4500 toward his balance, WagerHub stated that over 40 IP addresses resolving to Canada were linked to the bettors account, and that he would not be paid the remainder of his winnings. The player does not reside in Canada. The player denies ever releasing his account details to any other person, and requested that WagerHub supply a list of the IP addresses associated with his account. The player then concluded that bets placed on his mobile phone were being linked to Canada. He states that after speaking to his cellular provider's technical department it was explained that his mobile phone carriers main server is located in Canada, and due to his geographic proximity his assigned IP is Canadian. SBR is investigating the complaint.
02.25.2010 (06:01 PM CST)
A WagerHub (SBR rating D-) player funded his account with $800 via an eWalletxpress deposit. The player states that he bet successfully with WagerHub and increased his balance to between $4-$5000, before the deposit was ruled as being made with insufficient funds. The player states that WagerHub offered him a deal that if he sent $834+ fees via Western Union to cover the deposit he would be allowed to continue betting provided he played for at least 30 days. WagerHub confirmed to SBR that this arrangement was made. The player sent a $900 Western Union to WagerHub and proceeded to increase his account to more than $9,000 before eventually zeroing out his account. The player later wrote to SBR when eWalletxpress informed him that they never received the $900 from the sportsbook. The player covered the second $900 out of pocket to eWalletxpress so that he could reopen his account. SBR is in the process of gathering more information into the chargeback dispute.
| Read more
02.03.2010 (08:59 AM CST)
WagerHub (SBR rating D-) has agreed to pay the player from SBR's February 1st report. WagerHub has informed SBR that a payment of $2500 was sent to the player last night. Originally his betting account was closed and an $8200 balance deducted due to what was labeled nonrecreational play. WagerHub told the player that his $500 deposit would be refunded and winnings nullified. WagerHub has stated it will make arrangements to send the rest of the winnings. SBR will update this report once the entire balance is confirmed as paid. | View WagerHub complaint.
02.01.2010 (05:15 PM CST)WagerHub - SBR initiates rating coverage at D-
02.01.2010 (10:11 AM CST)
WagerHub (unrated) has confiscated $8,200 in player winnings citing nonrecreational play. On January 14th a player funded $500 to his WagerHub account by credit card. After one week of play his account balance increased to $6,000. On January 22nd the player was sent an email that he was being limited to $250 per wager. The player continued to bet with his new limits and increased his balance to $8,200. WagerHub then closed the account stating that the bets were nonrecreational, and that the $500 deposit would be refunded. SBR considers the action theft and will communicate this point to WagerHub. | View full WagerHub sportsbook complaint.
| Read more
01.29.2010 (04:49 PM CST)
On December 21st, a player requested a $1400 withdrawal from WagerHub (unrated). On December 23rd WagerHub provided the player with a reference number which Moneygram rejected as being nonexistant. The following day WagerHub again supplied the player with a nonexistant Moneygram reference number. WagerHub refused to discuss the details of the invalid Moneygram reference numbers with SBR, but did state that the player would have a payment sent on January 19th. No such payment was made. Players with disputes against WagerHub may submit a sportsbook complaint form.