Before the advent of CCTV systems and when casino gambling was shaping up as an industry, mistakes had to be paid in real cash. The point is that when the house (the dealer) made a mistake, the customer used to get the benefit of the doubt, and was paid after an explanation based on the technical aspects of the game. The principle of this type of problem solving was based on judicious operating practices.

During the course of thousands of gambling cycles in a night's work, it is safe to assume that dozens of mistakes take place in a casino, mainly on the customers' side. When a customer error is not detected, the house always benefits as a result. On the other hand, the house, which has to conduct play to the highest standards, after extensive and constant training of its personnel, would make up for mistakes by paying up, if the customer felt aggrieved and was not totally satisfied by the casino's explanation.

In these cases, the disputes went no further and the majority of players were none the wiser. The casino retained the confidence and goodwill of the customers, and this would translate into future revenue for the business. The argument that this type of problem solving was open to abuse was offered by operators whose training programmes and technical expertise was not up to scratch.

With the rapid expansion of gaming worldwide and even faster technological development on gambling devices, there are operators who are happy to stand fast on operating errors by blaming the game software and pointing a finger to the sign that reads 'malfunction voids all play'.

During the last 3 months of 2006, casinos from Manitoba in Canada to Buenos Aires in Argentina have had machines announcing millionaire payouts, which have been deemed technological errors with the casinos refusing to pay the clients. Litigation lawyers and lobbies opposed to gambling have jumped on the bandwagon, and the industry in such locations has begun to experience public rejection. The fact is that the public does not understand about 'malfunction that voids play' in cutting edge technology devices, which is how the publicity hype describes these games.

What about the operator? Well, they're just fine! They are happy to point fingers to the 'malfunction' signs and hand over vast sums of money to fat lawyers to defend a bad situation. There is no question that the machines failed and showed payment errors, or that they just went 'nuts', as players say. What have also failed are personnel training in problem solving for these type of errors, and customer training on how to play and winning expectations. Now public confidence, which is feeble at the best of times, lies in tatters.

The fact is that most of the information on machine play talks up prize money and Jackpots but not only lacks data on how to achieve such payments, but also does not advise players to check out top machine payments or the malfunction rider. The fact is that the gambling devices are also designed by human beings who can make mistakes, irrespective of the cutting edge technology that backs up the product.

And when an error or mistake is made it should be faced up to with intelligence and thoroughness, to assuage the customer's anguish. You see, it's so hard to obtain a sizeable prize in a casino, a Jackpot or similar, that clients’ moments of triumph must be handled like a delicate china doll, not by pointing the fat greasy finger to the 'malfunction' sign. Above all, the house must use a surgeon's sure touch and be prepared to resolve discrepancies with care and without lawyers. (E-01.09.07)

© Copyright 2007 CasinoCompendium



>>> return to archives
>>> return to frontpage