Self exclusion from a casino

Here is the scenario:
-a person self excluded themselves from a casino
-the person goes and gambles at the casino he/she self-excluded themself from
-after gambling for a while, the person is identifed by casino personnel
-at the time the peson is identified, the person up $1500

What are the consequences for the self-excluded player? Can the person be arrested? Does the person have to give back their winnings? etc etc

Self excluding yourself is not a joke and
is taken seriously by the casino. They want
to avoid a lawsuit and you will escorted off
the property, or in some cases the police
are called. As far as the money goes, should
the casino pay it back if the guy lost $1500?

Hi Fleas, i read a story about this a few days ago, similar to the one at http://calvinayre.com/2011/11/28/casino/self-excluded-winnings-seized/ . (Couldn't find the original source.)

It's not often clear when dealing with casinos, of which is the case. More or less, one has to be first-hand involved in some way to know for sure of any of the settlement(s). I could only speculate on this one; and the reason i didn't completely read the longer version which i can't find now. In general, casinos do often "shell out" tens of thousands of dollars in such civil suits. Eg, i personally know of a waitress being improperly fired for complaining of minor back-problems who won a couple of hundred thousands after her union became involved.

In my opinion, such confusion stems from the casino-industry's "argument" that no one has to gamble. And their ignorance of the fact that then no one has to really provide either for such occasion to gamble. Hence, the "strange hoops" every one involved ends up "jumping through" at some time, or another.

deleted

I think the linked article answers the question.

Quote:

Individuals who have placed themselves on the list have signed an agreement that all winnings are subject to forfeiture.

They also state that this is necessary to take away the incentive to want to keep gambling. Makes sense to me. We'll do our best to keep you out of our casino, but if you still make it in, and win anything, we're not going to let you keep it.

Quote: Fleaswatter

Here is the scenario:
-a person self excluded themselves from a casino
-the person goes and gambles at the casino he/she self-excluded themself from
-after gambling for a while, the person is identifed by casino personnel
-at the time the peson is identified, the person up $1500

What are the consequences for the self-excluded player? Can the person be arrested? Does the person have to give back their winnings? etc etc

They're screwed. Whether they're 86'd as a result of a bar fight or voluntarily exclude themselves, it amounts to the same. Only difference is the voluntary has an easier time rescinding the exclusion.

I've seen several cases of this, and every time it's the same thing. They exclude themselves, then show up some time later and make it onto the floor (not incredibly difficult as security can't remember every face). But we flag their players card, so as soon as it goes it, we get a notification. Just a few months back we had a guy make it in but wasn't using his card. He was getting away with it, until he hit a $8,000 j/p. Once his ID was obtained, he was reminded of his exclusion, his j/p was voided, and he was issued an appearance ticket for trespass.

If he was up they should have just waited a while to walk him out of the casino!

deleted

Really? Wow, seems like that isn't the right thing to do, might scare off people thinking of taking a break.

I guess now would be a good time to remind that I'm tribal, and don't necessarily speak for the entire industry.

NJ
has time frames so you can be on the list for 1yr up to life and can take yourself of the list.
If the casino wins the money is forfeited below is from NJ DGE site under fin & stat info.

"under $100,000 are split equally between Casino Revenue Fund and Compulsive Gambling Programs.
For forfeitures over $100,000, Compulsive Gambling Programs get $50,000 and the balance goes to the
Casino Revenue Fund."

Quote: Face

Really? Wow, seems like that isn't the right thing to do, might scare off people thinking of taking a break.

I guess now would be a good time to remind that I'm tribal, and don't necessarily speak for the entire industry.

Yeah, Iowa is the same way. Once you are on the list, you CANNOT step foot on the property. In fact, I think if you are caught ANYWHERE on the property (buffet, hotel, etc) they can arrest you. I'm not sure of that, but I used to know a security guard and he said it was VERY serious.

I'm guessing Illinois and Indiana also run the same kind of rules.

Quote: Tiltpoul

Yeah, Iowa is the same way. Once you are on the list, you CANNOT step foot on the property. In fact, I think if you are caught ANYWHERE on the property (buffet, hotel, etc) they can arrest you. I'm not sure of that, but I used to know a security guard and he said it was VERY serious.

I'm guessing Illinois and Indiana also run the same kind of rules.

Hmm. Our place is the same where you cannot step on the property, not even for buffet or concerts or gun shows. In that regard we are the same. But, we have an appeals process if you want back in, regardless if the exclusion was voluntary/involuntary. You have to wait a while and cannot come back until you receive a rescindication letter, and the letter isn't always guaranteed, but it's at least possible. It seem Ibeat is saying once you're on the list you can never get off, which is what I considered a might harsh.

deleted

Quote: Fleaswatter

What are the consequences for the self-excluded player?

Casinos often seem arbitrary and capricious about this stuff. One man being arrested for trespass after he went back to leave a tip for the restaurant waitress.

In California it seems any comment, even jocular or drunken, about banning oneself from the casino must be acted upon immediately. Chips and comp points are cashed out and security escorts them out the door. Trespass arrest if on casino property at any time for any purpose within one year and a day.

>I think I’m the only person who enacted a one year self-exclusion from the premises while they were winning.
The above is a line from a Discount Gambling Dot Net blog about a man who excluded himself from a California casino when angered by some heavy handed treatment from a pit boss about buying bets from other players. The blogger held the exclusion form up high for all his regularly toked dealers to see.

This just happened yesterday.

Ban Lifted

It seems from other sources I'm reading that 65% of
all casino bannings are self-banned. And if you manage
to get back in and win, they won't pay you, and have
even won in court for doing it.

Granting a right to petition for name removal after five years seems reasonable. One has either conquered problems by then or made enough money despite them.

Quote: FleaStiff

Granting a right to petition for name removal after five years seems reasonable. One has either conquered problems by then or made enough money despite them.

"Petition" makes it sound like it will be a difficult task. On the contrary:

Quote: Kansas City Star

Requests will be approved as long as it’s confirmed that the person filing the application is the same as the one who originally asked to be banned.

In BC there is court case that just got permission to proceed started by a couple of self excluded winners.

Hamidreza Haghdust won jackpots totalling about $35,000 in 2009 and 2010, while Michael Lee won jackpots worth $42,484.

Alternatively, Haghdust seeks restitution of his accumulated losses on bets he made playing slot machines at various BCLC gaming facilities since 2007, which he claims amount to more than $250,000.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/casino+winners+after+jackpot+turned+jack+squat/5798915/story.html#ixzz1g3c2uJ7c

The lawyer is also trying to get it certified as a class action case. If successfull this will likely have repercussions across Canada if not the US.