Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyLou
The mgr I spoke with did claim that removing balances due to 'dormancy' is not something done very often, and actually surprised him.
They are going to discuss putting up a clear policy in their TOS addressing dormancy.
|
i don't think you understand the bone of contention here, the rogue behaviour here is NOT that the book does not have a clear & specific dormancy clause.
it's that they consider an account that is logged into frequently and a "few months" void of wagering activity DORMANT in the first place! that's aboslutely absurd, a dormancy rule is inapplicable unless we are talking about a minimum period in terms of YEARS (~5 years or so imo) with NO loggin activity and NO wagering activity.
imagine if this is standard industry policy in large volume books! say a trader with 6 digit balance passes away, there will at least a period of few months before the rightful next-of-kin gain access to all his financial records