Betphoenix Self-Exclusion Issue

[JoeVig]

i have no clue and don't ever want to find out.

just saying that if they are forced to make sport bets i might have a better shot of noticing them before hand.

My point was, if there is no motive behind the "hacking" then perhaps there was no "hacker" in the first place.

Not accusing the OP of being the culprit, but a hypothetical unethical account holder would possibly have a motive of taking a shot at the casino and either winning, or claim "hacking" upon a loss.

[skrtelfan]

Yes, you can. Turning off a casino is a service. It is not entering into a new contract. Unless you can find it in the rules of the book.

When a book has as many security holes as BetPhoenix does, they damn well are responsible. You also can't find in the rules of the book that say "it's ok for us to transmit your password in plain text in the URL for 5 months."

[KGambler]

To what end? What motive does the alleged hacker have to "zero out" an account? Vandalism? Some black-hat work on behalf of the sportsbook?

Affiliates have a clear motive. When you lose money to the BetPhoenix, they receive a commission from BetPhoenix. My account was hacked. So were the accounts of others, and at least two of us had the same affiliate, a guy neither of us had ever heard of (SBR should have been our affiliate in both cases).

BP has a history of having accounts hacked, and then blaming the victims, but in this case I have to say this guy must be at fault (for the hacking, not the failure of BP to exclude his account from casino play). Otherwise, he would have come back here and filled us in on the rest of the story...

[midnight777]

they are ok...

[sq764]

on the one hand, the casino should have been disabled and apparently it wasn't. You have written confirmation the casino was turned off? on the other hand, your account being hacked twice sounds fishy, to say the least. Not saying you did this, but the thought comes to mind of someone asking the book to disable the casino, finding out it wasn't disabled for some reason and then taking a freeroll by playing in the casino anyway, knowing that if he'll lose he should get a refund. either way, if you have written confirmation the casino is disabled you should have a good case.

i dont think it should matter, the bottom line is he excluded the casino and BP did not honor that.. no excuses