technically u didn't lose the money u will get the deposit money back so chalk this up as a practice session you were playing black jack with play chips, now go to one of the casinos in canada and show the world that you can do it again for real this time
-
Comment -
If everything is legit I hope you get it all back....What bothers me is everyone back stepping after attacking him and saying Well imagine your in my shoes....nah Imagine being in his shoes some jerk off jumping down my throat over a misspelled phrase or misrepresented word..If everything is legit and he lost 35k I'm sure he's not proofreading his posts to appease the masses I know I wouldn't..Comment -
Yes but importmoon, you are jumping over and not acknowledging the fact that the book didn't put out a "wrong spread" This book (pinnacle) PUT deposit money in his account BEFORE they really got it, and then when they didn't get the deposit money, they took his winnings!
That's not a "bad spread", that is 100% THEIR fault. THE SPORTSBOOK put money in his account, and he gambled it and won, and then they stole his winnings and didn't pay.
Period end of story.Comment -
i'm still struggling with the fact how u were allowed to make 9 deposits without a successful transaction from ur bank account to the instadebitComment -
Exactly right calvin, if he is being truthful, then it means that instadebit gave the money to pinnacle without having the money yet, then pinnacle also gave the money to his account without having the money yet! LOL TWO business entities gave out money that they hadn't received yet!!!... HUH?
Comment -
I'm just wondering what pinnacle's statement is going to be to SBR. I mean is pinnacle really going to say:
"We put money into our client's accounts all the time before we actually receive it, and then if we don't actually receive it later, then we confiscate their winnings."
LOL you've got to be kidding!
Comment -
Hell I'll tell a story of why I don't bet at Hertitage anymore. I sent them my M-grm control number and they put the money in my account. I gambled it up well into the thousands, and then, of course, I kept on in the casino until it was gone. Then a few weeks later I won off a credit card deposit and when I requested a payout they asked me to pay the last M-grm deposit because they never got it!
It turns out that according to M-grm, I have a "common name" of someone that they don't do business with and they had put a hold on the money. I had to call M-G & give them my I.D. & my middle name to prove I wasn't that other guy.
I never even knew Heritage didn't get the money until then! (Heritage said they had "left a message on my phone about it") So I cancelled the m-g and went & got my money back. Apparently, what they do is check and see if the control number is real and then if it is real, then they put the money in your account before they actually go pick it up.
Like I told Heritage: "I never asked you to put the money in my account before you had picked it up at M-G! Why didn't you shut down my account as soon as you couldn't get the money? You just let me keep on gambling until I lost it all and NOW you say you never received the money & you want me to pay it when I request a payout 2 weeks later?"
I said "that's ridiculous, how do I know that you would have paid the 2 grand that I was up before I lost it all?"
They might have done the same thing as pinnacle did and took my winnings. How do I know?
I told them: "If I had asked you to front me the money before you picked it up, then I'd pay every dime of it, but I NEVER asked you to put money in my account that you hadn't actually received yet!"
I said "You people make ALL the rules when you have someone's money, and I can't do anything about it, but if you put money in my account BEFORE you actually received it, then it is 100% YOUR FAULT! So please don't make me pay for YOUR mistake!!!"
Anyway they said that they would only take 20% out of my withdrawals until it was paid.
Hell I had to say O.K. or I got nothing!
I haven't played there since and don't plan to ever play there again. I love Heritage but why should I pay for THEIR mistake when I never asked them to front me any money before they received it?
MAINLY because IF I had tried to cash out that 2 grand instead of losing it, then how do I know that they wouldn't have done the same thing to me that pinnacle did to this guy? And simply say that they were taking my winnings because the deposit wasn't received?
Well if the deposit wasn't received, then WHY THE HELL DID YOU PUT THE MONEY IN MY ACCOUNT?
O.K. the end.Comment -
Well yeahI'm just wondering what pinnacle's statement is going to be to SBR. I mean is pinnacle really going to say:
"We put money into our client's accounts all the time before we actually receive it, and then if we don't actually receive it later, then we confiscate their winnings."
LOL you've got to be kidding!
I can only assume you are a very honest person who has no clue how people try to scam books and payment systems with methods exactly like this.
If you do a deposit that is later revoked, so is all the betting attached to that deposit. At every single book in the world.
As I said earlier. If he can sort out the deposit issue, so it shows he really has an account with the $4500 odd he deposited... and there is a reasonable explanation for the problem that occurred, then Pinny may well provide some goodwill. But they are are in no way responsible to honor betting for dishonored funds. No book would! Especially when it looks exactly like a common scam. And even more like some degen addict gambler who knew he could get all those deposits in without the money there and couldn't stop himself or didnt care at the time as long as he could keep playing. It seems quite weird you feel so strongly it should be otherwise really..Comment -
OK optional, you say: "But they are are in no way responsible to honor betting for dishonored funds."
Well how the hell did funds that could later be "dishonored" ever get into someone's account if they weren't already received??!!
So what you are saying is that it is a "common" thing for sportsbooks to grant people money in their account before they actually receive the money??
If that is what you are saying, then it is their OWN fault if they don't get paid by a customer.
This ain't the days of little house on the prairie where you "borrow" hay and then pay it back a week later in milk after your cow eats the hay & produces milk. LOL That is called credit and the person giving the hay is taking a risk. This is real money we are talking about!
So I'll say it again:
If ANY sportsbook (or ANY business on earth) gives you something before they actually receive the money, then it is a credit risk, and 100% their own fault if they don't get paid!
Nobody EVER asked them to take such a risk and it is absolute greed to do it. And if they choose to take the risk before they actually have the money, then it is 100% their own decision and 100% their own fault if they don't get paid!Comment -
u should be grateful to know that because of your actions pinnacle will prob sure up this glitch where they don't get the money before somebody goes hog wiled on themComment -
If any sportsbook puts money into an account before they actually have the money, then it is THEIR fault and no different than "free money" that they often give on your birthday or something!
If they let somebody gamble money when they haven't received the money yet then it is nothing more than
"CREDIT WAGERING"!!
Remember that site called "Credit wagering"? LOL
Look here at this article Mr. Optional, your OWN site SBR has this to say:
"Credit Wagering
Credit Wagering shut their doors several years ago, but the story of the sportsbook is one that bettors should take note of, especially for US markets.
The online bookmaker, who opened their doors in 2008, marketed themselves as credit shop rather than a post-up sportsbook. The vast majority of sites we go over at SBS are post-up sportsbooks, meaning that players will have to deposit funds before they can wager.
A credit shop is a sportsbook that allows bettors to wager without depositing first, giving them a balance, but requiring them to pay the sportsbook after a given period if they incur losses. Traditionally, this is how local bookies operate.
Credit Wagering adopted this offline model, except with a few added, predatory caveats. The model itself relied on bettors to pay once they lost, despite not depositing any money. Of course, bettors also had to trust in the fact Credit Wagering would payout as well.
As you’ll see, the experiment fails on both ends.
Initial Sportsbook Review Rating
Sportsbook Review initiated their coverage of Credit Wagering after players discussed the sportsbook in the SBR Forum. They advised, rightfully, for bettors to use caution with the then anonymous, “play-now, pay-later” bookmaker.
SBR reported a slow-play complaint for the sportsbook just over two years after they added the sportsbook to their database:“I have a balance of $5,059.85 at Credit Wagering. I requested a check payout for $3k on January 19th, 2010. I have no received any payment since then. They have blamed it on processor problems, and promised me a free ** payout for around $800. But that has not materialized. I have always paid them on time. I have received several payments from in the past on debit cards or **. This near three months delay has been the longest. Thank you very much for your help.”Credit Wagering’s issues didn’t stop with just one complaint. More and more slow-play complaints came into SBR, and while they did make good on some smaller payout requests, the amount owed began to rise.
Their slow-pays, just reported to SBR alone, totaled over $10,500 before the site unceremoniously shut their doors in June 2010. Though they organized payment plans for the players owed, these were also delayed multiple times.
After promising to pay players in full in August, their total debt owed continued to swell as players with account balances unwisely continued to bet, hoping that the now offline sportsbook would make good on their promises.
SBR downgraded Credit Wagering to an F rating in January 2011 with the amount being owed to players at more than $22,000. Once again, this only takes into account those who reported their slow-pays to SBR. The full amount owed to players was unknown and may have been considerably larger.
Rollover Issues
The credit line situation aside, Credit Wagering’s terms offer a relatively significant edge in terms of their rollover requirements. Remember, the $1,000 offered to players wasn’t a bonus, but instead, money to wager before players had to settle up.
Their original terms stated that players would have rollover the original $1,000 five times (5x) before they could cash out any profits. A 5x rollover is standard for sportsbook bonuses, but remember this usually comes with a significant portion of freeplay or cash bonus dollars as well.
In the case of Credit Wagering, the rollover was attached to $1,000 line of credit, but no bonuses or freeplays were available. This increases the sportsbook’s edge quite a bit and is basically the equivalent of a local bookmaker forces players to wager $4,000 or more before they can get paid.
I.D. Scandal
Credit Wagering’s model is one that absolutely will result in them not being paid in many cases. Offering a credit line, with the only requirement being that players must send in photo identification is a recipe for disaster.
Of course, many players tried to “freeroll” them by betting with their credit line looking to run up a balance but then decided to not pay them after they busted their accounts. We know that Credit Wagering wasn’t paying players who won, so they weren’t holding up their end of the bargain either.
It’s important to remember that many sportsbooks, including highly reputable ones require some form of ID and/or utility bill before players can withdraw. This protects both the player and the sites from fraud and identity theft.
However, what Credit Wagering did with player IDs was bordering on criminal. While their site was still active, they produced a list of “Stiffs”, which contained players who decided not to settle up when they lost.
Listing the names of players who didn’t pay is bad enough, but Credit Wagering went even further by posting the IDs of players on their site opening them up to all kinds of harassment and potential identity theft.
To make matters even worse, they got the names wrong of many that stiffed them and ended up posting the photos of random gamblers (some who have not been paid or those who paid when they lost) to their “Hall of Shame” portion of their site.
Credit Wagering Sold?
In January 2011, Credit Wagering was allegedly sold. An email was sent to customers that they would work on getting everyone paid, and the new owners would be working “on getting the site back to the way it used to be.” Of course, this is something that SBR and the rest of the community took with a heavy grain of salt. An offline, insolvent sportsbook which offers a credit shop business model is suddenly bought up from an undisclosed buyer – something is not right here.
SBR suspected as much and made the point that they are likely going through the motions to possibly flip their domain, which may still offer value to other shops:
“Scam sportsbooks that feel their domains still have value will often attempt to deflect responsibility for player accounts due to being under ‘new ownership’. SBR will again attempt to speak with CW regarding delinquent player accounts and the alleged sale.”
Resurfacing As WagerOnCredit.com
In 2013, a new site at the domain, WagerOnCredit.com appeared online. The sportsbook is extremely similar to credit wagering in both appearances and business model. They offer players a credit line, but some players did report that they also got a small bonus if they opted to post-up before wagering.
A Covers.com Forum post that appeared in 2014 discusses the comparisons and the “buyout” that took place in 2011. One user alleges that “Josh” from Credit Wagering is running the operation at Wager On Credit. Judging from the similarities between the two sites before Credit Wagering went offline and their supposed “sale” in 2011 – this isn’t much of a leap to make.
In Conclusion
What can bettors learn from the Credit Wagering/Wager On Credit fiasco? Well, other than that these guys are scammers and should be avoided, it’s that if it looks too good in the offshore industry, it probably is. On its face, a $1,000 credit line looks appetizing, but the fine print and the assurances of being paid were simply not there for bettors.
They are still in operation but are suffering from the same payout complaints that plagued their previous “sportsbook.” There are some forum posters that report being paid, but they are few and far between, and could very well likely be shills posting in forums in an attempt to entice more players to deposit."
Comment -
Thank you Calvin, Sportsbooks just shouldn't be allowed to put money in a client's account that they could later say was "dishonored funds" or "never received"!!
Any Sportsbook that puts money in a client's account, and then lets them gamble it before they actually receive the deposit, could (and I say COULD) just wait & see if the client won, and then simply lie and say they never actually received the deposit! And then they could cheat every winner that ever won out of their winnings!
I told Heritage and bodog to NEVER front or credit ANY money in my account and let me gamble it and then tell me later that it really wasn't in there!
That's absolutely absurd! I DO hope Pinnacle adopts the same procedures! Anything else is absurd!Comment -
Totally impossible to run any business if you don't give the client the goods or services before the actual money comes through. Do you think a business gets a credit card payment instantly? This can take days before the actual money gets to the business account. Same goes for almost every non-instant payment method.
Would you agree with books keeping a **** deposit for a few months "on hold" so they can be sure the money will not be charged back if a client decides to scam them? Because that's exactly what you're saying. The business has not received the money yet from the credit card company, they have "provisionally" gotten it and are subject to having to give it back if the credit card company charges it back. It's in the T&C they signed when they agreed to accept CC payments.Comment -
Yes sir Alpha, I'm not trying to bust your bubble here, but I run a pizza business, and if V i sa or M-card or any other c-card ALLOWS the transaction on their end without denying it , then they guarantee the payment to the merchant. So I do have the money and I am risking NOTHING on my end! Of course I don't get it right then, but unless the customer does a charge back, then I'm guaranteed the money! That's why I pay a ridiculous percentage to the c-c companies!!!
And I don't know how new you are to sportsbooks, but these days they DO put a 30 day (or longer) hold on C-card deposits before you can get a payout, JUST so people can't get a payout and then charge the card back. Thus solidifying that they get their money. (The ones that do lose their c-c deposit before 30 days and then charge the card back is a risk that the books do take, because of how much money they make on c-cards.)
Also W-Unoin and M-grm and Bit-coin are ALL "instant cash"!! Once the money is received on those, you can't reverse those types later! So I don't really think you know what you are saying!
Read what I said about "risk", if any company lets you have ANYTHING before the money is in their hands or guaranteed, then it is a credit risk that they are taking, and if they don't get paid then it is their OWN fault!Comment -
Now if i accept a check, then it is a total risk on my end! But any Sportsbooks that do accept checks DO make you wait until they have cleared! c-cards with 30 day holds and money transfers and bit coins are NOT a risk at all for sportsbooks UNLESS they put the money in a client's account BEFORE they have the actual money!
That's all I ever said.
I thought books had it covered every way possible to NEVER put money in a client's account UNTIL they actually had the money.
Obviously, with this "instadebit" service out of Canada, Pinnacle is putting money in client's account BEFORE they actually get the money.
Well, all I'm saying is if they are fronting money into people's accounts before they actually have it, then it is their OWN fault!
And they should never be able to go back and say "we aren't paying you even though WE are the ones that put the money in there before we actually had it!" That's absurd & they could do that to every winner that ever won IF they wanted to!
Would you sell a car and let a guy drive it off that told you the money would be in your account in 3 days? LOL Hell no, you'd tell him he could have the car AFTER you had the money! You wouldn't let him drive it off BEFORE you had the money!!
Why did Pinnacle not make this guy wait until they actually had the money from instadebit BEFORE they put the money into his account? They don't "front" money for other forms of payment!! Why did they front the instadebit transactions instead of waiting for payments to clear , like they do the other forms of payment?
If they had, then NONE of this happens because he never would've had the deposits put in his account.
It's 100% their fault if they fronted money into a client's account before they actually had it!
It's that simple to me.Comment -
I presume a pizza business does not have to deal with charge backs very often. I own a company that deals with bigger single payments and the CC company most definitely does not guarantee us the payment. There is a risk of a charge back and it's in their T&C, simple as that. So, as you said so yourself, ("unless the client does a charge back") there is no guaranteed money. The 21 standard days does not guarantee the book will get the deposit, you can sometimes charge back a credit card up to months after the transaction, although it obviously does reduce the risk.
What I'm saying is, books allow clients to play with money they haven't actually gotten in their pockets yet all the time. It's not "their" fault, it's the way payments work. You're saying the book shouldn't be allowed to put money in an account for the client to play with if the money has not been received with a 100% certainty. I'm saying that's not workable as it would instantly scratch a bunch of funding options, which is why they have placed a condition in their T&C that all bets/plays are void if the money does not come through in the end (or gets charged back).
This is stipulated in the book T&C, which you agree to before signing up. If, for one reason or the other, the deposit you made does not go through it's most definitely not the book's fault for already having credited your account (that's just decent customer service), but your own.Comment -
Just be thankful it's online. You go into a casino for the first time with 4k and win 30k in blackjack then you're more likely to end up 4k down and with a few broken bones.Comment -
Correct again. They are in no way responsible for honoring bets made with dishonored funds. No mater when those funds are dishonored.
This isn't a tough concept. If you dont pay your entry fee you don't win any prizes.
It's also the morally correct way, apart from the being standard industry practice.
Yelling your opinion over and again is not going to make you any more correct. You really only need to give it once. ;-).Comment -
No alpha I plainly said that c-cards weren't actual "money in hand" for the S-books because they could be charged back! Read here what I said:
" (The ones that do lose their c-c deposit before 30 days and then charge the card back is a risk that the books do take, because of how much money they make on c-cards.)"
Then,like I also said, There is NO RISK for the OTHER forms of payment, like B-coin, W-uinion, and Mon-grm because they ARE instant payments and once they are received they can't be "charged back". Please stop posting about the c-card payments NOT being cash that can't be rescinded. i've already said twice now that c-cards aren't like cash like the other forms of payment are! S-books take their chances on chargebacks because of how much revenue c-cards generate!
So stay on point. If the Sportsbook put a c-card deposit into an account BEFORE they saw whether it was declined or not by the bank, then it would be their own fault! This pinnacle place put money in account BEFORE the funds were verified! So it is their OWN fault!
They don't ever put other types of payments into an account BEFORE they are verified so why'd they do it with instadebit?
Whatever reason they put it in the account without verification is moot. they owe the money that was won on these funds. They can't go back and say "We are stealing your wins because we shouldn't have ever put the money in your account before we verified that it was good" LOL That's absurd!Comment -
The point is, they put money in accounts before they are 100% certain they have it all the time (like e.g. credit card deposits). Why should this be different for Instadebit?Comment -
LOL Optional you are at it again! Lets just agree to disagree! You say:
"This isn't a tough concept. If you don't pay your entry fee you don't win any prizes."
I say if a company ACCEPTS your payment for the "entry fee" and puts you in the contest, before they actually receive your money, then they owe you the prizes!
Why did they put you in the contest before they actually had your money? LOL That would be 100% THEIR fault!
They can't go back and say "WE accepted your entry fee, and put you in the contest, but now after you won we didn't actually get the money so you really don't win!"
LOL That's absurd and their OWN fault for putting someone in a contest before they actually had their entry fee!
Hell I'll run a contest right now for $100 apiece! And whoever wins, I'll just say I really never actually got their money even though I put them in the contest!
LOL that's absurd.
Comment -
I know I never want to see any money in my gambling account that the sportsbook might steal back later after I gamble it and win!!
I never even knew there were ways to get money put into a sportsbook account and gamble it before the S-book actually had the money!
And I sure as hell never knew that I could gamble money that a S-book had put in my account only to have them steal it back later and say they never got paid!
UGH!
Why the hell did you put it in there & let me gamble it then?
That's absurd to me!Comment -
BlowJoe, this isn't some social justice warrior issue that the OP needs you trying to fight for him. Especially from such an ill-informed angle.
If his deposit problem can be resolved and explained satisfactorily then the book should honor his winnings. Doing that would not normally be a problem for you or me. It should not be too difficult for the OP either if he is bona fide.
If he can't then he won't be seeing a cent and should not.
It's not a matter of opinion. This is the way the world works with books..Comment -
I mean if they fall back on saying we put money in your account but it didn't go through, that could be used on every single client who slaps in money and hits big.
Opened the door to control possibly nobody ever winning due to that .
You put in a new $100 hit a 10 teamer , sorry deposit didn't go through.
Put in 10k , play 1 play , sorry deposit didn't go through.
I've played as many , never ever been able to bet prior to funds from my account hitting theirs to be honest.
I mean ever in 20 yearsComment -
That would be a scam book. Why would they bother paying anyone, ever if you think about it that way...
Just deposited into 5dimes by bitcoin. They credited the money before there was a single confirmation. That puts them at risk of me double spending the coins...this discussion is moot.Comment -
Pinnacle never stiffs anyone
Just throws out shot takers
Zero toleranceComment -
Short odds are this guy purposely transposed a number of the routing or account numbers. Took a shot, with the intention that he would act like it was a mistake if he hit, and then give them the correct info, hoping to collect. And if he lost, the plan was to walk away.
Long odds are that this guy made an honest mistake.
Fire holer is correct that it is strange that this guy emailed his bank account statements and ID's and everything "as a precaution". It is more likely that he only sent instadebit this email with the correct info after he hit pinny for the 34kComment -
Seemed too calm and collected with his replies for my liking. I'd be losing my gd mind. But then I'm naturally cynical, aka realistic.Comment -
With pinnacle there are no disputes because they are that honest
They are never wrong and if they did not pay case closed
Thread overComment -
I have no commenr on this other than to say $34,000 is nothing to pinny, so for them to balk at paying it tells me a little
Also, they have a sound risk mgmt teamComment -
his bank bailed on his ass and his book almost got caught with the bill and he is filing a comlaint about the book lol...he should log onto a bank forum and file a complaint with his bank. in real life it is on you if you put yourself in a vulnerable position, he knew there was a chance this would happen thats why he was prepared with all the statements, dumb move was not to wait till his bank cleared.Comment -
Instadebit will transfer thousands of dollars into any account you nominate without first making sure your funds have cleared?Comment -
I just told you guys what happened in post #168 but nobody fukkin listens.Comment
Pinny was paying out and his BANK has fukked him..not pinny