The player's right to claim on an error

Agree or disagree? Why?

1. If an error occurs on a table, then the player has a right to claim and point out any money that should be his. This is NOT his job, but it can fairly be considered his right or his responsibility, if knowlegdable.

2. A player does NOT have a right to take money that he knows is NOT his. However, due to human nature, he may sometimes try, especially by silence. He may truly be ignorant of the situation, or he simply may fake ignorance of the situation, and hope it is not noticed.

3. If a player and his dealer did NOT know or spot an error, casino management may correct the play in a reasonable amount of time, that being, if the player is still at the table in the same session. Players who "knew and took" may play innocent without issue.

I think that this is a well thought out and articulate compromise to the years(?) of debate we have seen on this issue. I think even #3 is a little pro-player. The casino management probably has the right to ask for money back regardless of where the player is, maybe even off property. I doubt they would or should do this, just that they do have the right.

#2 is going to happen with some people, maybe most, whether we like it or not. I do it. What bothers me is the sense of entitlement rare players get when a mistake in their favour is pointed out, and they object to its correction. You may think it's bad customer service, but the casino is right.

My high school french teacher corrected final exams really pretty poorly. Lots of errors in her favor and lots in our favor. If you wanted the mistakes fixed that would benefit you, her policy was that she'd re-correct the entire thing and anything that was incorrectly benefitting you already would be fixed. That's how I see this question too; the price you pay for the right of having mistakes fixed where you were shorted or whatever, is that errors in your favor should be caught and settled too. Seems fair to me; I expect to be paid correctly and to have it rectified if I am not, and the house has the same expectation.

Quote: Paigowdan

A player does NOT have a right to take money that he knows is NOT his. However, due to human nature, he may sometimes try, especially by silence. He may truly be ignorant of the situation, or he simply may fake ignorance of the situation, and hope it is not noticed. [I would add that a player may even merely hesitate too long and therefore be thought to be faking ignorance].
Players who "knew and took" may play innocent without issue.

It is the casino that creates the atmosphere: air conditioning, music, cleavage, free-flowing alcohol, hope, excitement, eyes on the jackpot, not that which is most likely, etc. .... therefore it is the casino that gives up the right to say to a player "you knew". Maybe he did, maybe he is just a little bit slowed by "the buzz" or maybe he is truly innocent and was not paying as close attention as the casino thinks he was.

If the casino wants their money back, that is there right, but they should do it without embarrassing accusations, particularly if a player is with his spouse or spousal equivalent. Some shot takers only materialize with that third drink and the casino is the one who is pouring the drinks down the customer's gullet.

I agree the casino has the right to ask for the money back, however I do believe that is bad customer service, especially if it is a nominal amount to the casino.

deleted

What is a reasonable amount of time for the casino to ask for the money back and depending on the time elapsed what should be the burden or proof? They aren't going to provide surveillance tape but if several months have gone by I think more than "you owe us money is needed".

Quote: IBeatyouraces

Just because something is legal doesn't make it a "right."

You mean like card counting?

Quote: 1BB

What is a reasonable amount of time for the casino to ask for the money back and depending on the time elapsed what should be the burden or proof? They aren't going to provide surveillance tape but if several months have gone by I think more than "you owe us money is needed".

We can ask Steve Wynn on this. Or....
It varies by casino. Generally, if you're still at your session, it is reasonable to ask.

I posted a comment in another thread about mistakes in favor of the player that I received a phone call at my home "the next day" and was told that upon a review of the surveillance tapes that they discovered an error of an overpayment to me and I was expected to return the money to the casino.

deleted

I find this topic fascinating for a number of reasons. I've followed it in its various incarnations on this board. For me, it has applications outside of the casino environment. My most recent client is a restaurant owner, and in conversations with management and wait staff, a number of issues, and how to deal with them, are brought up.

A personal anecdote: Years ago, I went to dinner with a group of friends. We ordered an appetizer, which didn't arrive. At one point, we saw a person deliver a plate of appetizers to an adjoining table. When our meal arrived, and our waiter came to ask how the food was, we mentioned that we didn't receive the appetizer. He apologized, and got the appetizer made for us. As I'm sure you've already figured out by now, our original appetizer was delivered to the wrong table. However, when that table received their bill, they complained about the added cost of the appetizer. They had never ordered it. Ultimately, the restaurant ended up giving out two free appetizers: one to us, as an apology for being late with our appetizer, and one to the other table, since they didn't end up charging them for it. While I don't know that particular restaurant's policies, the vast majority of restaurants take such expenses out of the waiter's pay, so the reality is that the waiter ended up paying for two appetizers. (And, in truth, they only paid for one appetizer, as I insisted on paying for the appetizer despite my tablemates' insistence that they somehow 'deserved' a free appetizer because it was late.)

Now, I can't speak to the mind set of the people in the adjoining table. Perhaps they thought that the appetizer they received was compliments of the house. What I do know is that none of them spoke up to ask the person delivering the appetizer what it was, or mention that they hadn't ordered it. But, even though they did eat the food, when the bill came, they were quick to argue that they shouldn't have to pay for something they never ordered.

One of the waitresses for my recent client brought up an interesting scenario. She has a customer who ordered a sandwich and asked for extra cheese. When the bill came, the customer complained about the charge for extra cheese. The waitress explained that ordering extra cheese incurs an extra cost, as indicated on the menu. The customer's response was that the waitress should have told the customer that there would be an extra charge, even if it is already printed on the menu.

When it comes to casinos, there are direct parallels between these two examples and situations that happen at gaming tables. In some sense, I think situations at casinos get to be a bit more heated, because there is direct cash involved, as opposed to indirect cash in the form of an appetizer or extra cheese. Nonetheless, it has become my current fascination in my study of people. I like watching how people at casinos respond and react when mispayments, either for or against, are made.

What I have noticed is that people who are winning, or at least perceive in their mind that they are winning, are more likely to make comments about a mispayment in their favor, and give the money back. I assume that their thinking is that since they are already up whatever amount of money, they don't mind giving the little bit back that was mispaid to them. On the other hand, people who are losing, or perceive they are losing, are more likely to keep quiet and hope the mispayment isn't noticed.

Of course, mispayments against the player are almost always noticed and commented on.

And, there are always exceptions. There are some people who will be scrupulously honest no matter what the circumstance, and others who are the direct opposite. You have people who are clueless as to what is going on, and just take or give whatever the casino tells them. I think that regulars, at a local/regulars casino, tend to be a bit more on the 'honest' side of things, perhaps because they don't wish to antagonize someplace they like to visit on a, well, regular, basis.

As a final anecdote, as a service to my clients, I often teach the management and owners how to detect employee theft. I preface my lesson with explaining that everyone is capable of stealing money that isn't theirs. It might require extreme circumstances, but everyone is suspect. The idea isn't to place extreme paranoia about every employee that they have, but rather to make sure that they don't overlook possibilities, simply because "old lady Maryanne has been working here for decades, so I know she wouldn't do anything." Anyway, a friend of mine commented that she had never, and would never, take any money that wasn't hers, no matter what. Not if she was dying, her child was starving, etc, etc. I told her that I would prove her wrong within a week. A few days later, as we came out of a building, there was a penny on the ground, and she picked it up. She always picked up pennies from the ground. I waited until she put it in her pocket, and then "gotcha'd" her. She said it didn't count, because it was only a penny. I replied that the point was she took money that she knew for a fact wasn't hers, without any intention of even trying to find the rightful owner.

It seems to me that justification provides the ultimate say in the matter. People feel justified in picking up a penny from the ground, claiming things from lost and found that aren't there own, casinos can afford to mispay someone because of all the money they've lost, Wal-Mart won't miss a pair of underwear with all the millions they are making, etc, etc. And maybe they are right. I certainly don't know. I just enjoy the conversation.

I don't believe a casino has the right to correct a mistake in their favor AFTER play has continued to the next hand. I suppose I still feel strongly that the casino is offering a service and it's their responsibility to ensure a fair and accurate game.

For example, what about the situation where a player is down to his last chip and a mistake is made and gets paid 5 chips instead of 1- so he now has a total of 6 chips. He then proceeds to lose 6 chips in a row and busts out- and at that point- the casino says, "Oh, and by the way, there was a mistake, you owe us 4 chips!"

Now think about this for a moment: you may think, "well- I'll just toss over the twenty bucks because I play reds..." Well, what if the patron was playing pumpkins and didn't have the four grand to "cough up"? Should the player, not having that kind of money on him, then get sued to "make good" for a mistake he didn't make?

I correct dealer mistakes about half the time. Can't you be happy with that Dan. lol

In all seriousness, there is one aspect that is often not considered when these discussions come up. Pointing out dealer mistakes could get him into trouble and bring extra heat on him. Now I am not saying that why I didn't point out that he just paid my push. But why create even more trouble for him. :)

Really? A penny on the parking lot and I can't pick it up?

Quote: DeMango

Really? A penny on the parking lot and I can't pick it up?

honestly, anymore, for a penny I can't make myself bend over to pick it up! Takes at least a nickel [g]

Quote: konceptum

While I don't know that particular restaurant's policies, the vast majority of restaurants take such expenses out of the waiter's pay

This is illegal and should be reported to the state department of labor.

Quote: Paigowdan

Agree or disagree? Why?

1. If an error occurs on a table, then the player has a right to claim and point out any money that should be his. This is NOT his job, but it can fairly be considered his right or his responsibility, if knowlegdable.

2. A player does NOT have a right to take money that he knows is NOT his. However, due to human nature, he may sometimes try, especially by silence. He may truly be ignorant of the situation, or he simply may fake ignorance of the situation, and hope it is not noticed.

3. If a player and his dealer did NOT know or spot an error, casino management may correct the play in a reasonable amount of time, that being, if the player is still at the table in the same session. Players who "knew and took" may play innocent without issue.

Wow, incredibly misleading thread title and poll, Dan. I would suspect that a lot of people are just voting on the thread title, and not agreeing on all three of your points.

Especially point 2, because how do you define "know"? If the player "knows" the money is not "his," then he is saying he is better at the supervising the game than the entire casino. Since it's the casino's job to run and supervise the game, if the player is paid, that money is his. Who is to say otherwise? The player? But he is not in charge of the game -- the casino is.

Is "knowing" binary, or is it on a continuum? Is it possible to maybe think you got overpaid, but not be 100 percent sure? What is the threshold of doubt needed for reporting such an error? 10%? 51%? 100%? "Knowing" is not a black and white thing in the real world, especially with beginning, drunk, or distracted players -- all of whose money the casino is happy to take otherwise.

Quote: sodawater

Wow, incredibly misleading thread title and poll, Dan. I would suspect that a lot of people are just voting on the thread title, and not agreeing on all three of your points.

Especially point 2, because how do you define "know"? If the player "knows" the money is not "his," then he is saying he is better at the supervising the game than the entire casino. Since it's the casino's job to run and supervise the game, if the player is paid, that money is his. Who is to say otherwise? The player? But he is not in charge of the game -- the casino is.

Is "knowing" binary, or is it on a continuum? Is it possible to maybe think you got overpaid, but not be 100 percent sure? What is the threshold of doubt needed for reporting such an error? 10%? 51%? 100%? "Knowing" is not a black and white thing in the real world, especially with beginning, drunk, or distracted players -- all of whose money the casino is happy to take otherwise.

Wow, so wrong again, soda.
1. The title was spot on, and brought an interesting discourse up until your entry.
2. The player either knows or he doesn't know. He doesn't "51% know" that his 20 beat the dealer's 18. He 100% knows. And if he's not 100% sure, then he 0% knows. I suppose your argument is that if the dealer is 51% sure that your 20 beat his 18, - then he can pay you 51 dollars on your $100 bet? Bullshit.

It really is for the most part a yes/no, true/false type of situation, if he knows the game and was paying attention. A player KNOWS if he had won (example: "Yes, the had dealer busted, so my hand wins...."), and if he's not sure, then he doesn't know.

It is a black and white thing to a great degree - (kind of like spotting a troll whose only purpose is to add an argumentative entry to take a shot at the OP, on an otherwise smooth-flowing thread [cough]. No doubt here, either.)

As in: a player either knows he won the money, or he doesn't, which usually indicates he's an innocent beginner or was distracted. Fine.

And the player is not in charge of the casino game - although TONS of gamblers THINK that they are! Trust me, I dealt for years.

BUT...a player is allowed to speak to the dealer on a play - especially to point out an error or an occurance at the table as it relates to game play, to bring to his attention. 100% allowable.

Dan,

I understand your point and I do feel the casino can ask for money back. I do feel it is in bad customer service, but that is their choice. It seems like you are asking the player to officiate the game and that it works both ways where it really doesn't. For example, if LeBron James feels he is fouled and there is no call he goes crazy and demands one, just like a player who did not get paid on a winning hand. If a foul is called on the guy guarding LeBron James, even if no foul occured, in your situation you would have him tell the ref, sorry I really was not fouled I do not want to shoot my free throws. This we know is ludicrous and would never happen, just like a player getting paid on losing hand. It is the officials responsibility to properly officiate a game, not the players.

If I feel the casino made an error against me, I can point it out, but the pit boss is the ultimate arbitor. I never get to change the result, I can only inform the 'umpire'. I then abide by his decision.

I play lots of basketball. If it is a refereed game, and he calls a foul on an opponent who did NOT hit me, I still go to the line and take my shots. I can ASSURE you, that ref does NOT want me announcing that, "wow.. I wasn't fouled, but thanks for the call".
Of course, if I was hit, and no foul was called, I will mention it to the ref, and they EXPECT that.
Basically, the refs (casinos?) expect people to stand up for themselves, but not the opponenet (casinos?).

I have asked Dan this many times, and I don't think I've ever received a straight answer....


IF I ASK A PIT BOSS--- IS IT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO POINT OUT AN ERROR IN MY FAVOR, WHAT WILL HE SAY?

I am guessing it will be a chorus of "no's".....

Quote: hook3670

Dan,

I understand your point and I do feel the casino can ask for money back. I do feel it is in bad customer service, but that is their choice. It seems like you are asking the player to officiate the game and that it works both ways where it really doesn't. For example, if LeBron James feels he is fouled and there is no call he goes crazy and demands one, just like a player who did not get paid on a winning hand. If a foul is called on the guy guarding LeBron James, even if no foul occured, in your situation you would have him tell the ref, sorry I really was not fouled I do not want to shoot my free throws. This we know is ludicrous and would never happen, just like a player getting paid on losing hand. It is the officials responsibility to properly officiate a game, not the players.

Yes, very true, asking for it back is indeed in poor customer service. Most places can and do let such an issue slide, especially for a high-rolling regular player. I will admit, if someone has been marked as a "shot-taker" by the house's management, and otherwise is known for trying to grab some "extra" by unsettling the dealer, etc., then the house may ask for it back, as letting a player-advantaged result slide is discretionary. Roughnecks get the rougher treatment. Floormen and pit bosses try to know who their players are.

Thinking about it some more, casinos should probably be more tightly regulated and fined if they make mistakes of any kind: whether payout-related or what have you. I'm not saying to take this to an insane level, but while most on this board are educated as to the rules of the game, what about people who are not or those who drink too much and can't tell? While I'm usually against more regulation, the truth of the matter is that casinos take in more by mistakes then they pay out. I should have confidence that someone mentally-challenged can sit at a table and receive a fair game. I should have confidence that if I want to have a few drinks I shouldn't have to pay attention to the game to ensure it's properly administered.

Quote: SOOPOO

IF I ASK A PIT BOSS--- IS IT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO POINT OUT AN ERROR IN MY FAVOR, WHAT WILL HE SAY?

I am guessing it will be a chorus of "no's".....

Believe it or not you're wrong, but not for the reasons you think.
He may say to you a number of things:
1. "No, it's not your job or responsibility." [standard pat answer] And this answer is less than truthfull to the player who is naive and stupid enough to seriously ask him this question. He is basically telling you, "If you see something, don't say something, I don't wanna know...." And this would be typical of most floormen.

or:
2. "Yes, if the dealer shortchanges you AND you know it, then by all means take responsibility and let him know! We might miss it and KEEP YOUR MONEY for that matter. The flip side is just as valid." [And this is a rare, honest answer which admits that dealers actually make mistakes that players may catch and speak up on. You SELDOM hear this!!]

In other words, the answer is "yes, it is your responsibility to speak up - because we may mess up and keep your money." And you know something? Clean play is true in any direction. You do speak up and take it as your responsibility in these circumstances, - when it's YOUR money on the line!" As a matter of fact, every effing time if it is in your favor only. So, it appears that players do indeed take it as their responsibility....half of the time - when it suits and services them. Now, SooPoo, you must have noticed this! [I'm ribbing you here, but am serious.] As a matter of fact, wrong plays can be pointed no matter in which direction they occur - to keep the game play really clean.

And this is along with two replies to this silly question that you may hear if you ask it:
3. "Who are you, man, really....our dealers don't make mistakes, and if they do, don't YOU worry about it, as that is MY job, - not yours, buddy!"

4. "What is it that you want, buddy....a buffet comp?" [thinking that you are angling for something.]

I had a situation that was somewhat in the reverse - I made a mistake in the casino's favor.

The first time I ever played a pitch game I made a mistake adding my cards, and thought I had busted. I put the cards down, and the dealer swept my bet into the chip tray. Only then did I realize I actually had 21, and told the dealer. She agreed, and called over the pit boss. He told her to put the bet back in my circle and play out the hand (I was on first).

I ended up winning the hand, and the dealer apologized over and over for the mistake. I told her she didn't have to apologize, since I was the one who miss-added the cards. Nonetheless, she said it's her job to verify my total before taking away my bet.

My point is that you either win or you don't, and a mistake doesn't change the result shown by the cards. That time I made a mistake and the casino fixed it. I have no problem with the casino correcting a mistake that goes in the other direction.

This calls to mind the Wizard's second commandment:

Quote: The Wizard

2.Thou shalt honor thy gambling debts.

A true gentleman honors his debts, especially gambling debts. When making a bet with another person you are putting your honor on the line. If you lose, you pay. No excuses!

Quote: Paigowdan

2. The player either knows or he doesn't know. He doesn't "51% know" that his 20 beat the dealer's 18. He 100% knows. And if he's not 100% sure, then he 0% knows. .

So you are saying it is impossible not to be sure of something? Are you seriously saying this? You are saying there is no valid uncertainty between 0 and 100%? That is an amazing statement to make, considering you are on a message board in part dedicated to probability.

Consider this: In the annals of three-card poker, do you think there was ever a player who wasn't 100% sure his ten high should be paid when the dealer has a jack high? Maybe he thinks it might be right but wasn't 100 percent sure? That situation is not possible?

Quote: sodawater

Quote: konceptum

While I don't know that particular restaurant's policies, the vast majority of restaurants take such expenses out of the waiter's pay

This is illegal and should be reported to the state department of labor.

Federally, it is not illegal. Money can be deducted from wait staff's pay for walkouts, or unpaid bills, as long as the amount deducted doesn't reduce the employee to below minimum wage.

Quote: US Deparment of Labor

Some examples ... financial losses due to clients/customers not paying bills.... Employees may not be required to pay for any of the cost of such items if, by so doing, their wages would be reduced below the required minimum wage or overtime compensation.

Department of Labor link
States may have different laws on this.

If casinos did this, I wonder if it would make people more likely to report mistakes made in their favor. I know some people feel it's ok to not point out a dealer mistake because the casino can easily afford the payout. But would they feel the same if they knew it was coming out of the dealer's paycheck?

Quote: konceptum

If casinos did this, I wonder if it would make people more likely to report mistakes made in their favor. I know some people feel it's ok to not point out a dealer mistake because the casino can easily afford the payout. But would they feel the same if they knew it was coming out of the dealer's paycheck?

Actually, many people would do it in a second - ask any dealer. Most People? The quote here is "not my problem, it's my money..."

Some players take shots not to get extra money, but to try to induce the dealer to mess up and get in trouble as a game or sport. The place I worked at permanently barred a handful of players for this.

I cashed in at a casino on the strip and was overpaid by $500 and had a friend also see it. I said nothing, and about half an hour later the Casino Manager comes over and says I was overpaid by $1,000. I say I certainly was not and he should go check again. (Had he asked for the $500 I would have immediately paid it back). At this moment I was up about $4,000 from a $5,000 buyin.

He comes back in half an hour and says they checked the tapes again and I was definitely overpaid by $1,000 at my cash in. However, at this point I had already REBOUGHT in as I had been losing, and he said:

"I know you bought in again and everything, and I CAN'T MAKE YOU PAY THE MONEY BACK, so it's up to you."

Quote: Paigowdan

Actually, many people would do it in a second - ask any dealer. Most People? The quote here is "not my problem, it's my money..."

Some players take shots not to get extra money, but to try to induce the dealer to mess up and get in trouble as a game or sport. The place I worked at permanently barred a handful of players for this.

I think this should be tested. Next time there is a dealer mistake, have the pit boss physically take the money from the dealer's tip pile, or tip box, whichever they are using. I want to see people's reactions to this. Especially if the mistake was made in favor of a player who was tipping.

This whole field of inquiry is ripe for a sociological experiment. I would love to be able to do one, although I can't really think of a practical way of doing it.

Quote: sodawater

So you are saying it is impossible not to be sure of something? Are you seriously saying this? You are saying there is no valid uncertainty between 0 and 100%? That is an amazing statement to make, considering you are on a message board in part dedicated to probability.

No, no, no and no.
What I am saying is that if you are not sure, then you "0% know" on that basis in gambling.

Gambling is basically a "you know that you know" the game result or situation, and that a gambling call is supposed to be "100% thing" at a table.

Can't always be, - but that IS the basis. And if you are uncertain, then you don't know. Gambling debts are taken and paid on a "surity basis," not on a "Maybe I think I won, so you pay my ass" basis.....it is:

"Yes, you won, and you get paid," OR "No, you lost, dealer takes the chips."

It is one of the fundamental requirements of a gambling game. If a dealer is ever NOT sure of a result or payout, he brings a floorman over TO BE 100% SURE of a result. A player who is experienced on a game is playing pretty much on that level, and he is sure of himself, and believes in himself, - when he corrects a dealer on a play. If a player is not sure, he watches and asks questions, and learns the game, but he doesn't run the game or correct the dealer on plays he knows he doesn't know, or is unsure of. And a good dealer is aware that the player is a newbie, and he teaches him the game as they play.

Quote: sodawater

Consider this: In the annals of three-card poker, do you think there was ever a player who wasn't 100% sure his ten high should be paid when the dealer has a jack high? Maybe he thinks it might be right but wasn't 100 percent sure? That situation is not possible?

Sure, it's possible. This was also me during my first five minutes on three card poker ages ago. It's called "not knowing the game" or "being a beginner."

If you know three card poker, then you know that all remaining non-folded hands get paid whenever the dealer has less than a queen-high, doesn't matter what the player has.

Quote: dyepaintball12

I cashed in at a casino on the strip and was overpaid by $500 and had a friend also see it. I said nothing, and about half an hour later the Casino Manager comes over and says I was overpaid by $1,000. I say I certainly was not and he should go check again. (Had he asked for the $500 I would have immediately paid it back). At this moment I was up about $4,000 from a $5,000 buyin.

He comes back in half an hour and says they checked the tapes again and I was definitely overpaid by $1,000 at my cash in. However, at this point I had already REBOUGHT in as I had been losing, and he said:

"I know you bought in again and everything, and I CAN'T MAKE YOU PAY THE MONEY BACK, so it's up to you."

There is Karma in this one......

How often when players complain is some ambiguous and/or unwritten rule the response followed by a no?

Quote: TheBigPaybak

I don't believe a casino has the right to correct a mistake in their favor AFTER play has continued to the next hand. I suppose I still feel strongly that the casino is offering a service and it's their responsibility to ensure a fair and accurate game.

For example, what about the situation where a player is down to his last chip and a mistake is made and gets paid 5 chips instead of 1- so he now has a total of 6 chips. He then proceeds to lose 6 chips in a row and busts out- and at that point- the casino says, "Oh, and by the way, there was a mistake, you owe us 4 chips!"

Now think about this for a moment: you may think, "well- I'll just toss over the twenty bucks because I play reds..." Well, what if the patron was playing pumpkins and didn't have the four grand to "cough up"? Should the player, not having that kind of money on him, then get sued to "make good" for a mistake he didn't make?

Interesting discussion, so I was surprised Dan, not to see you comment about what I describe above, which directly relates to your #3. Would you make an exception to your #3 or put the player in debt to the casino until they paid? Or something else?

Quote: onenickelmiracle

How often when players complain is some ambiguous and/or unwritten rule the response followed by a no?

Floor personnel consider and evaluate players' complaints in good faith. They agree and comply when the request is reasonable.

Quote: TheBigPaybak

Interesting discussion, so I was surprised Dan, not to see you comment about what I describe above, which directly relates to your #3. Would you make an exception to your #3 or put the player in debt to the casino until they paid? Or something else?

Casinos usually forget about it and don't worry about it. It's usually treated like losing a free bet coupon. Casinos would seldom badger a player is such a situation, it would be such a horrible PR/customer service move, - unless they deliberately wanted the player to never come back.

Quote: Paigowdan

Floor personnel consider and evaluate players' complaints in good faith. They agree and comply when the request is reasonable.

Oddly enough, even when its a casino initiated correction of an overpayment error... the casino is still the one with a great deal of negative publicity riding on the issue. They know players going back home and bad mouthing a particular casino can hurt. They know that if any incident makes the press and the casino is the least bit at fault it will look bad for the casino. So of course a floor man will try to be reasonable about any dispute. Speed of the game is a major consideration but its not the only factor.

Quote: Paigowdan

Casinos usually forget about it and don't worry about it. It's usually treated like losing a free bet coupon. Casinos would seldom badger a player is such a situation, it would be such a horrible PR/customer service move, - unless they deliberately wanted the player to never come back.

I guess my point is, if you wanted to apply *rules* to the situation, the rules should hold up in all cases and not just be at the whim of who's on staff.

Gaming regulations should also apply here: I wonder what they say- what the real law here is.

This is the same for any business. You shortchange a restaurant bill, you may be asked to take out your wallet. Then again, you might not be asked, you might be told "fuggetabout it, Tony," or something to that effect.

It is far more likely to be overlooked at a casino than in any other business.

Quote: TheBigPaybak

I guess my point is, if you wanted to apply *rules* to the situation, the rules should hold up in all cases and not just be at the whim of who's on staff.

Gaming regulations should also apply here: I wonder what they say- what the real law here is.

1. Do not consider as a whim an evaluation.
2. Floormen are human. If they like you, well, you are more likely "in." Humans are subjective, sympathetic, and biased, even when they don't mean to be.
3. There are many gaming regulation that are based on floormen/surveillance determinations at the scene. In other words, "as determined by supervision, management, and/or surveillance..." Disputes can always be presented to gaming, and they may agree with the casino or not.

So now when I go to a casino, where I am giving up expected value, I am now expected to do their job for them, while at the same time consume drinks from their open bar? What is next, poker dealers will be fired and players will pass the deck around and declare winning hands?

In all seriousness, don't I pay them so that I can sit at their tables so that I do not have to think? There is ZERO chance I am giving money back to security if they come around hours later and say "We reviewed the tape and they paid you wrongfully". My other bets were based on wins/losses. Do I get my progressive wagers back too?

If they want to avoid this then they should employ competent people. If they refuse to pay dealers enough to understand the rules of their games then I should not then be expected to do their jobs for them.

I am not saying players should sit at games with the sole intent of scamming bad dealers, but there is no way any recreational player should be expected to give the casino their chips after the fact. Even the suggestion of this will run off players. I would never, under any circumstance, play at a casino that decided I owed them money because THEIR employee made an error. They surely would not do the same thing when their incompetent dealer picked my chips up wrongfully. Maybe they would, but you could never make this argument when suits are trying to take my $20 Pai Gow winner an hour later.

I have to wonder who would even consider how this scenario would be OK. Employ competent people or deal with a certain amount the EV being lost on bad dealers. That formula has already been decided behind the scenes. "If we pay our dealers $2 more an hour we will attract ones that make fewer mistakes".

Casinos cannot expect that they can take chips back later from players later and not suffer a huge loss to their reputation. Again, this behavior has an EV on their side too.

Remember we are the most savvy gamblers in LV, think about the $10 player that will feel the casino stole their money when asked to pay it back.

I have to ask again, why is this even up for discussion? What is next, Domino's telling me their cooks put too much cheese on my pizza? Do I have to worry about the driver knocking on my door one hour later asking for $2 more because they accidentally put extra cheese on my pizza and I did not call them when I opened the box?

What if Clark County appraised my house for $500 less than it is worth, am I expected to call them about the $10 in property taxes I owe them?

Enterprise let me slide on a car rental that went 1.5 hours after the return time. Do I turn that office in?

This entire argument is so absurd, if you refuse to train competent dealers then you are forced to take the risk that your players will not do your job for you. You cannot expect that. A vast majority of them are even more clueless than the incompetent dealers making these same mistakes and as soon as security makes a scene about it more harm than good has been done.

Quote: Paigowdan

1. Do not consider as a whim an evaluation.
2. Floormen are human. If they like you, well, you are more likely "in." Humans are subjective, sympathetic, and biased, even when they don't mean to be.
3. There are many gaming regulation that are based on floormen/surveillance determinations at the scene. In other words, "as determined by supervision, management, and/or surveillance..." Disputes can always be presented to gaming, and they may agree with the casino or not.

So do you feel an exception should be made in these cases or do you feel the casino has a right to a debt?

Here's a casino mistake that some may find interesting and that I have personal knowledge of.

A person that I know quite well was erroneously given 6000 comp points. In this casino a point is $1.00 and can be used for anything that is sold on the property. This person immediately went on a shopping spree, spent every last dime and was caught within the week. This person is still a member in good standing, still welcome and still plays there regularly. The casino put a balance of - 6000 points on the card and all points earned are charged against that debt.

This person appears to have not a care in the world and acts like nothing happened. I don't know if I could show my face there but everyone's different.

Heck, one woman erroniously claimed she lost 200.00 in a room break-in ... the casino knew her room door was only open for twelve seconds and that their luggage valet guy was honest (and not fast enough to steal within 12 seconds)... but they replaced her two hundred dollars..... they knew she would lose it all back to them eventually and she did.

Quote: FleaStiff

Heck, one woman erroniously claimed she lost 200.00 in a room break-in ... the casino knew her room door was only open for twelve seconds and that their luggage valet guy was honest (and not fast enough to steal within 12 seconds)... but they replaced her two hundred dollars..... they knew she would lose it all back to them eventually and she did.

This is what the savvy casino does and they do get it back. I have seen countless disputes, some from confused players and some from shot takers and the casino almost always favors the player and even the shot taker one time.

Does anyone recall our friend's dispute at Revel? For the casino it's a straight up business decision nothing more.

I'm going assume the player didn't know he was overpaid. In that case the casino has no business asking for it back ,once you have used that money to bet with. absolutely not. Once you you use that money to buy something, once again absolutely not. The reason why I think this is one may have set a win or loss limit IE. you bring $700 so lets say you buy in for 500 in chips and start betting $100 a hand on BJ. You only allow yourself a $500 loss Limit because you need to save $200 for rent. Yes rent is cheap because your living in the naked city splitting rent with your girlfriend who just lost her job as a waitress while playing crack whore roulette for her tips. While your playing the dealers pay you on a loser giving you an extra $200 no 1 noticed. You keep playing until you are at zero chips. Then they realize their mistake and make you pay back the $200. Now your broke and you cant pay your rent. All because they made a mistake.

Quote: AxelWolf

I'm going assume the player didn't know he was overpaid. In that case the casino has no business asking for it back ,once you have used that money to bet with. absolutely not. Once you you use that money to buy something, once again absolutely not. The reason why I think this is one may have set a win or loss limit IE. you bring $700 so lets say you buy in for 500 in chips and start betting $100 a hand on BJ. You only allow yourself a $500 loss Limit because you need to save $200 for rent. Yes rent is cheap because your living in the naked city splitting rent with your girlfriend who just lost her job as a waitress while playing crack whore roulette for her tips. While your playing the dealers pay you on a loser giving you an extra $200 no 1 noticed. You keep playing until you are at zero chips. Then they realize their mistake and make you pay back the $200. Now your broke and you cant pay your rent. All because they made a mistake.

It's why I voted "no", because of item #3: I just don't believe after play has continued behind the current hand that casinos should be able to retroactively change what has occurred. There's too many situations where it's just gets too gray, resulting in all sorts of problems. And besides, what goal does it accomplish?
1. Do casinos make more money stopping the game while they try and figure out an issue? Probably not. Net everything they probably lose money from diminished play.
2. Do players appreciate it? Of course they don't: they get all upset and some may never patronize the place again.

So in the end: it ticks offs players and casinos make less. So what's the point?

Quote: TheBigPaybak

So do you feel an exception should be made in these cases or do you feel the casino has a right to a debt?

Yes, casinos, like all business, have a right to a debt. And, like all business, can make a call to forgive or absorb a debt as a consideration.

Quote: AxelWolf

I'm going assume the player didn't know he was overpaid. In that case the casino has no business asking for it back ,once you have used that money to bet with. absolutely not. Once you you use that money to buy something, once again absolutely not. The reason why I think this is one may have set a win or loss limit IE. you bring $700 so lets say you buy in for 500 in chips and start betting $100 a hand on BJ. You only allow yourself a $500 loss Limit because you need to save $200 for rent. Yes rent is cheap because your living in the naked city splitting rent with your girlfriend who just lost her job as a waitress while playing crack whore roulette for her tips. While your playing the dealers pay you on a loser giving you an extra $200 no 1 noticed. You keep playing until you are at zero chips. Then they realize their mistake and make you pay back the $200. Now your broke and you cant pay your rent. All because they made a mistake.

All because they corrected a mistake, - a mistake's correction that players would insist upon for themselves, and also well into the future.
Yes, sometimes it is pushy and rude, and bad for customer service and the perception of an establishment. Many times, more often than not, casinos wisely abandon or forgive the debt for the sake of future business.

Quote: TheBigPaybak

It's why I voted "no", because of item #3: I just don't believe after play has continued behind the current hand that casinos should be able to retroactively change what has occurred. There's too many situations where it's just gets too gray, resulting in all sorts of problems. And besides, what goal does it accomplish?
1. Do casinos make more money stopping the game while they try and figure out an issue? Probably not. Net everything they probably lose money from diminished play.

Sometimes yes it is, and sometimes to acclimate people to honor their debts.

Quote: TheBigPayback

2. Do players appreciate it? Of course they don't: they get all upset and some may never patronize the place again.

So in the end: it ticks offs players and casinos make less. So what's the point?

The point isn't always about what players may or may not appreciate, though sometimes it is.
The point is to correct the mistake and enforce the honoring of the debt - based on the actual result and play of the cards.

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes, casinos, like all business, have a right to a debt. And, like all business, can make a call to forgive or absorb a debt as a consideration.

But shouldn't the casino bear some responsibility in these cases? After all, it was *they* who made a mistake in the first place.

I just can't see how they can make a mistake, and then essentially have a patron go into debt from their mistake and not bear any responsibility in the manner.

I know I can't do that in my business...