Guess there's more than one way to recoup your losses

Sad when you need to blame others for your problems.
CBCNews wrote:
A $3.5-billion class action lawsuit has been launched on behalf of thousands of addicted gamblers who say they asked to be barred from Ontario's casinos, but were still allowed in.

The suit was filed against the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation on Tuesday in Toronto, claiming that the corporation did not do enough for those who signed up for "self-exclusion," a program that allows people to have themselves banned from casinos so that they can curb their ruinous gambling habits.

Those who sign up for the program are photographed and registered, and their information is stored in binders at every provincial casino. If they are caught trying to enter a casino, they can be arrested for trespassing.
But gamblers who spoke with CBC News on condition of anonymity said the program doesn't work. One woman said she registered for the program, but her gambling addiction led her back to a casino soon after.
"I walked through, no one looked at me," she said. "I kept gambling for the next couple of years."

Lawyers say the OLG should be using high-tech systems to catch self-banned gamblers. In the Netherlands, gamblers present photo identification at casinos, and their identification is checked against a computer database, lawyers say.

Lawyer Jerome Morris said the suit is designed to help addicted gamblers who have lost large sums of money, and their families. But he also hopes the suit will bring about changes at casinos across the continent.
"[We hope it sets] a precedent that not only benefits all members, but that will benefit anyone who is subject to the dangers of gaming in North America," he said.

Ontario has settled nine individual lawsuits pertaining to self-exclusion, but has never been hit with a large class-action suit.
The OLG has argued in the past that it is ultimately up to the gamblers themselves to stay away from casinos, although the corporation has expressed interest in obtaining facial recognition technology to improve its screening process.

Problem gamblers hit Ontario casinos with $3.5B lawsuit

Comments

  • It's so nice to know that when I get that addicted that I have to put a 'self ban' on myself...at least I can rest assured that I can file a law suit and get rich the old fashion way ;)

    Self ban is such a stupid concept.
  • I loathe the victim mentality.
  • Self ban is such a stupid concept.

    Well it's basically lip serving pandering to the religious right who think gambling is a moral evil. Seems to me if they're going ot have this self-excusion program, then the burden is on them to enforce it. Not doing anything opens them up for lawsuits.
  • I so want to be self banned from Fallsview, but apparently it's ban one, ban all.
  • At least the house doesn't have an edge when you gamble on a lawsuit.
  • zunni74 wrote: »
    At least the house doesn't have an edge when you gamble on a lawsuit.

    Sure they do...HOUSE = LAWYERS...they all get paid
  • A friend of mine recently did the whole self-ban thing. It took them over 3 months to complete the process, which is kinda crazy. Now, if he goes into any casino he can get charged with tresspassing.
  • Well, if they win, I think I know where there settlement will be spent . . .
  • I self banned once about 10 years ago at Casino Niagara and about 5 years later I reinstated myself went through the process and then about 2 years ago i went to Elora track slots and the security came and took me to the security desk and I explained everything and once they checked it out in Toronto they let me back in. Apparently it does wrok sometimes. Can I get in on that law suit. LOL.
  • Agreed. I'm shocked that the OLG casinos does not have facial recognition technology that I thought was standard with most casinos. How can they prevent known cheaters, suspended +EV card counters, or disguised employees from playing?
    BBC Z wrote: »
    Seems to me if they're going ot have this self-excusion program, then the burden is on them to enforce it. Not doing anything opens them up for lawsuits.
    Lawyers say the OLG should be using high-tech systems to catch self-banned gamblers.
    :
    the corporation has expressed interest in obtaining facial recognition technology to improve its screening process.
  • BlondeFish wrote: »
    Agreed. I'm shocked that the OLG casinos does not have facial recognition technology that I thought was standard with most casinos. How can they prevent known cheaters, suspended +EV card counters, or disguised employees from playing?

    From the Brantford Casino workers website (Brantford Casino Workers :: View topic - problems gamblers hit ontario casinos w/ 3.5billion lawsuit

    They do have facial recognition software but don't use it for this reason <to stop self-bans>, they use it recognize known cheaters who try and come in. Maybe they should use for this reason as well, but probably won't.
  • zunni74 wrote: »
    From the Brantford Casino workers website (Brantford Casino Workers :: View topic - problems gamblers hit ontario casinos w/ 3.5billion lawsuit

    They do have facial recognition software but don't use it for this reason <to stop self-bans>, they use it recognize known cheaters who try and come in. Maybe they should use for this reason as well, but probably won't.

    I'm sure the cost of operating this system would be prohibitive to be used for self banned clientele. Casinos would rather use it to catch thieves vs some addict that doesn't know enough to stay the hell out. What kills me is that those who implement a self ban think they can blame the casinos for them not having the strength or will power to stop themselves.

    Like the needle houses in Vancouver. Makes zero sense.
  • I wrote a paragraph on the catch 22 of needing strong language to create a plausible deterrent, and the inability to live up to that phrasing. (and no, I don't think deterrents are ideal)

    but I erased it in favour of saying this whole idea of suing because the casino's tried to create SOME, but not infalliable, help is sickening.

    Maybe we'll luckbox and this lawsuit will lead to these business not being able to allow 'self-bans' anymore and those degens will come give us all more money.
  • STR82ACE wrote: »

    Like the needle houses in Vancouver. Makes zero sense.


    This makes me throw up violently.... we can discuss in PM if you'd like

    Mark
  • DrTyore wrote: »
    This makes me throw up violently.... we can discuss in PM if you'd like
    pics or gtfo
  • I self banned myself in niagara 10 years ago. I still go to vegas about 4 times a year to play poker. I found out now that I am not allowed in any Harrahs owned casinos since Windsor casino is runned by Harrahs. Have no interest in stepping into Niagara again, but in order to play in vegas I have to reinstate myself at Niagara, Faxed a letter to them, but not sure how the process works and how long it takes.
  • This makes absolutely no sense, then can't OLG just counter sue and say that they were trespassing. Its not the responsibility of the facility to see who gambles, what is their financial background, whether they are mentally competent to even gamble...all they do is provide a 'quality' (some ambiguity there) service.

    Some people have absolutely no shame. They go out and lose all their money, probably in debt, and they go out and file this bogus law suit that basically says I am a moron. After when they lose and have to pay for lawyer fees, they will look even more like idiots.
Sign In or Register to comment.