Quote from: Rating Place on August 28, 2025, 04:42:13 PM

Quote from: yahoo62278 on August 28, 2025, 06:54:57 AM

Quote from: ptaylor78 on August 28, 2025, 06:01:21 AM

Is it not concerning

What I find concerning is the amount if time it takes to get replies. You posted this accusation August 21st and holydarkness starting getting in contact on the same day. We are now a week into this accusation and really not much further than we were a week ago. Someone asks a question, then we gotta wait for someone to get online and answer, and then again another question comes, and more wait time. It's comical honestly in this day and age. Almost like messenger services and telephones and faster communication of any sort never got invented. This case will be solved by December 2027 at this rate.

Obviously I know we will have answers faster possibly, but it does irritate me the amount of time it takes. @holydarkness no offense to you as you're doing a service to the community by using your time free of charge to help out, BC doesn't ever seem to be in a rush. I also realize that if you push too hard for answers, they may cease contact at all.

Need to find a faster way to communicate. Get the 2 parties online in the same message service and get to the bottom of things in a day vs 2 weeks.

I agree with you 100%. BC stalling is worrisome. This should have been a one day case. The OP has proof on June 19 that his loss limit was set. If BC has nothing to contradict the contact between the OP and CS, then the OP is right.

That’s the reality of online casinos if you don’t choose carefully. A casino can look at five pieces of evidence, including what its own employees confirmed on June 19, and still deny it. Instead, they claim loss limits were set on June 26 and refuse to refund or accept accountability. Their only proof is “system records,” which they won’t provide to the player or post publicly.

On August 15, a BC.Game support agent even claimed the loss limit lockout notification I received on June 19 was actually a self-exclusion notification for a self-exclusion period that supposedly ran from May 19 to June 19. Yet there is a clear record of thousands of dollars wagered on June 19. BC.Game still has the gall to claim I was in self-exclusion that day. The shifting, unsupported stories used to avoid responsibility are discouraging.

Again I ask: If BC.Game will go to these lengths to avoid accountability for $1500, imagine how they would handle an issue involving a more significant amount?