[Justin7]

A player signs up with a sportsbook, deposits and plays. When he signs up, there is a way to get free withdrawals. After the player signs up, the book starts charging $40 for withdrawals. A player complains that he would not have signed up if there were going to be withdrawal fees. The player was charged $120 for 3 withdrawals.

Fair or foul? Do you think the book must reimburse the player (and all other players who deposited before the rule change) for withdrawal fees?

[BigFish]

Yes. The player was induced to deposit funds and play at the sportsbook by the promise of free withdrawals. A deal is a deal. The sportsbook received it's end of the bargain and thereafter should not be permitted to welch on what it promised to do (provide free withdrawals). In a US court (if gambling were legal), player wins this one easily.

[John Dough]

All books should have a disclaimer stating "deposit/payout methods and fees are subject to change at any time." In the current climate, that's pretty much a given, but it's not 100% fair to expect every customer to understand that. It also sucks when this happens of course.

Clearly the book is within its rights to change their deposit/payout policies as it sees fit. So no, I don't think the book MUST reimburse the player. That said, as a matter of good faith and good customer service, I would hope the book would make an exception and offer some sort of compromise (i.e. offer to pick up half or all of the fees, offer 1-2 free withdrawals out of the 3, etc.). Several books have behaved similarly in these situations in the past. For example, there was a recent thread about how BetOnline began charging for B2B transfers and a few posters who had signed up when they were free had pretty much the same complaint you outlined above. Eventually, I believe BetOnline decided to offer them 1-2 free transfers.

To say that the book MUST offer free withdrawals is setting an unreasonable precedent IMO. Especially in light of recent processor issues, grandfathering in every customer when a policy changes is impractical. Offering a one-time compromise or exception, however, seems fair.

[mighty maron]

A player signs up with a sportsbook, deposits and plays. When he signs up, there is a way to get free withdrawals. After the player signs up, the book starts charging $40 for withdrawals. A player complains that he would not have signed up if there were going to be withdrawal fees. The player was charged $120 for 3 withdrawals.

Fair or foul? Do you think the book must reimburse the player (and all other players who deposited before the rule change) for withdrawal fees?

1. How long after he signs up does the policy change? Weeks...months..years
2. Was the player emailed announcing the change and given a chance to withdraw for free?
3. Is there a rule or policy saying that the promo could be changed at any time without notification?
4. Is it just for him, his country, or for the entire site that the policy change is in effect?

B rated book or above he should get his money back. Anything below B rated and you take your chances. The aforementioned factors might come into play but just by this post he should get his money back.

[dark star]

He should be grandfathered in under the rules which he signed up for.The book could say"starting Jan. 1 we will start charging for payouts"Clearly,the book should be able to right this

[katstale]

Player should at least have been offered the original deal once and then told it was going to change. problem with books now, is the change happens without warning.

[Kindred]

They should give him a free withdrawal. If he got a bonus and they changed the bonus terms midway through him clearing it that would be a clear violation, not very different from this.

[BET THE HOOK]

The book should inform the player of the change and offer them a chance to cashout free and play elsewhere if he cant live with the new rule.

[shari91]

I don't believe if a book offers free withdrawals today, then it's obligated to offer them for any length of time into the future. Whatever that time frame may be.

But they ideally should have a disclaimer on their site stating as such and definitely give reasonable notice about policy changes so a player has ample opportunity to withdraw their funds for free. The notice should be communicated to each individual player ie via email and not just a blanket statement on their website as it's fair to assume that some players may not see that before the change takes place.

If there was no notice and no disclaimer, then all fees should be refunded to everyone. If there was a disclaimer and no notice, I'd suggest 50% of fees. If ample notice was given and the player still chose to leave their funds at the book, he/she isn't entitled to any refund at all in my opinion as they implicitly accepted the policy change.

[secretstash]

i think that the player sometimes is forced to "stay" in the book with 15 or 30 day holds OR to complete 10X rollovers... they should get at least that same time period to make a withdrawal based on the old terms.. it wouldnt be fair if u deposited via VS or ** and had a 15 day hold to clear and during that time they changed the withdrawal policy... that would be shady if they then did not allow u to withdrawal for old policy (in this case "free")

-stash

[McFly86]

$40 withdrawal fees?

In my opinion the player should be entitled to one free withdrawal, and thereafter the book is entitled to charge fees.

[Jerm3462]

Bait and switch much?

That's just unethical. I would withdraw and never play there again.

Imagine buying a brand new car. Being told you get a 3year/30,0000 mile bumper to bumper warranty.

So at 26,000 miles the passanger door falls off while driving down the highway (it's a Ford).

So you head back to the car dealer to have the warranty repair work done, only to be told they switched the warranty to only be valid for 20,000 miles. Sorry pal. That will be $1300 please.

WTF? There aint a person in this world who would stand for that.

Stop babying these sportsbooks. If they say free withdraws, its FREE Withdraws.

Note: I am aware that most of you aren't Americans and don't really grasp the whole "customer service" thing.
But when you are brought up with the ideal that customer service is the key to successful business, its hard to agree with any other point of view.

Edit: After reading some more replies, I understand that books may have to adjust their fee schedule from time to time. But the people who signed up when it was FREE withdraws, should be entitled to some advance notice and at least 1 FREE withdraw. (There, I lessened my stance......happy?)

[wtt0315]

so if i sign up at a book that offers 20 percent reload bonuses and they stop it after they sign up does that mean they have to continue to give me the 20 percent for the life of my account/.

[roanildinho]

What book? justin7

[in play, run(s)]

I think it's unfair unless the book informed all players via e-mail about the rule change, and also the player should have been notified about the fees when trying to withdraw like Pinnacle or Bookmaker do it, for example.

Of course the book can have something like "all rules are subject to change, and it's the client's responsibility to keep track of these changes" in their T&Cs but that's not what you can expect from your average customer, I mean seriously, no one is checking the t&c's every week to see if something changed. 99.9% of the players wouldn't notice and go on to withdraw and be surprised and upset about the fees.

[jairocon]

Books should be able to change their fee structure, but they should also have enough courtesy to advise their players in advance and maybe allow them one more free withdrawal before or after the fee change.

[Hareeba!]

so if i sign up at a book that offers 20 percent reload bonuses and they stop it after they sign up does that mean they have to continue to give me the 20 percent for the life of my account/.

very poor analogy indeed.

the book should have allowed a reasonable time, say 90 days for all existing clients to withdraw as much as they want before applying the new fee

[ncsubowen]

They should give him a free withdrawal. If he got a bonus and they changed the bonus terms midway through him clearing it that would be a clear violation, not very different from this.

This. He should at least be allowed one free withdrawal under the previous policy. After that, he's had the opportunity to leave the book and therefore agrees to the new terms.

Also, why go through three withdrawals before complaining? Wouldn't you speak up at the mention of that first one?

[relaaxx]

Player should at least have been offered the original deal once and then told it was going to change. problem with books now, is the change happens without warning.

The book should inform the player of the change and offer them a chance to cashout free and play elsewhere if he cant live with the new rule.

Books should be able to change their fee structure, but they should also have enough courtesy to advise their players in advance and maybe allow them one more free withdrawal before or after the fee change.

these all seem fair

[Euphoria38]

I agree these all seem fair, unfortunitly due to the changing of processing methods the fee's are variable. Perhaps the book can offer a discount on transferring balances to other books if available.

[boatboatboat]

allow the player to have ONE free withdraw for all he has in the account. If he decides to leave any $ and continue to play, he has no reason to bitch about the withdraw fees

[the_situation]

very poor analogy indeed.

the book should have allowed a reasonable time, say 90 days for all existing clients to withdraw as much as they want before applying the new fee

this

[noober]

Of course they should give the money back. I understand withdrawal fees but $40???

[TomG]

It's fair as long as 1) the changes apply to all players equally 2) the book makes a reasonable effort to maintain consistent withdrawal policies (no continually changing withdrawal fee policies) and 3) the new withdrawal policies are consistent with industry standards.

In the current offshore gaming environment, it's overly burdensome on the book to require them to adhere to old policies when the landscape has changed so dramatically. Any additional effort they take to compensate players is an additional benefit but is not required.

[scott235]

All competitive books should do their best to give 1 free per month anyway....and for sure if it is a big reason why you deposit in the first place. Like I said though, one a month, players have to be reasonable and flexible too.

Get everything in writing, and I mean everything, save all chats and emails.

[bubba]

i think its an obvious answer. books can change there fees to anything they want, but should offer a "warning period" to allow customers to withdraw for the old fees/for free. i was in a similar dispute with a book and they agreed to send me $ for free. anything after this 1 time offer was my choice to keep funds in their. seemed fair to me.

[FreeFall]

Book cans change this anytime they want. It goes back to if we grandfather in rules for certain players on the time of joining. My personal experience in in the industry is NO they don't do this at all. The players thought process was mal-informed in this case.

[Jontheman]

i think its an obvious answer. books can change there fees to anything they want, but should offer a "warning period" to allow customers to withdraw for the old fees/for free. i was in a similar dispute with a book and they agreed to send me $ for free. anything after this 1 time offer was my choice to keep funds in their. seemed fair to me.

Exactly this - perfectly fair on everyone and every player who ended up paying the fees would have made that choice. Well, almost. Obviously somebody with pending futures bets that go on to win may get stung for a withdrawal fee they never signed up to. However I'd say that's just one of the risks of placing futures bets.

[chunk]

They should use common sense business practices like others do(banks, brokerages, etc). Advance notice of changes and if a customer has a reasonable gripe, give out 1 free withdrawal as a sign of good faith. The rest would be his choice.

[Dark Horse]

Retroactive = Radioactive

[TomG]

At least for US Customers, the offshore gaming industry should not be compared to a bank, brokerage, or any other legal business. Offshore sports books face issues that those industries do not. It's simply not realistic to require them to adhere to standards of a totally unrelated industry.

Allowing a grace period before new policies come into effect would be nice. The problem is that this would create a deluge of withdrawal requests--something that many books are struggling with and the very thing they are trying to reduce.

Moving money is expensive. It is part of the cost of doing business in this industry (on both sides of the counter), and the cost has gone up. It's reasonable to pass that expense onto the customers.

[RickySteve]

One free payout as a gesture of good will. Player pays going forward.

[Monte]

40 bucks lol, no book i ever played with didn't have at least 1 free per month or just a $15 fee.
Must be a crap place indeed.

[mtneer1212]

One free withdrawal. And a notice that any future withdrawals shall have a $40 fee. If the player wants to take all of his funds out with one withdrawal as a form of protest, so be it. Otherwise, one freebie, then the new rule takes effect.

[beyond]

Looks like this book is either sbgglobal or betroyal