Double Down Casino Lawsuit

admin 8/3/2022

In April 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Double Down Interactive and International Game Technology for allegedly misleadingly representing that its online casino games are free to play when, according to the plaintiffs, consumers need chips to play the games and, after they use all of the free chips given to first time visitors, they must purchase additional chips to play the games. Plaintiffs also. Doubledown casino cheatsJust drop not only cash prizes, but also free doubledown casino cheats spins. Double Down has been sued in a proposed class action lawsuit, Benson v. Double Down Interactive, LLC, No. 2:18-cv-00525-RBL, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The lawsuit claims that Double Down players are entitled to a refund of ALL money they have lost on Double Down because it is an unlicensed gambling game.

Is Double Down Casino Rigged

With millions of players DoubleDown Casino is the best free casino where you can enjoy a variety of games including over 30+ free slots, slot tournaments, multi-player poker, video poker, bingo,. Information about Double Down Casino was first submitted to Scambook on May 04, 2014. Since then the page has accumulated 8 consumer complaints. On average users reported $254584.63 of damages. Scambook's investigation team reached out to this company a total of 6 times, Scambook Investigators last contacted them on Dec 26, 2012.

Share this article

A handful of lawmakers in Washington state have put forth legislation aimed at preventing class-action lawsuits against video game companies. Two similar bills have been put forward in the state's Senate and House of Representatives this month that would change the legal definition of 'illegal gambling games' to carve out an exception for video games.

Both pieces of legislation would add a sentence to existing gambling law stating, 'For purposes of this section, 'illegal gambling games' does not include online games of chance when played solely for entertainment purposes with virtual items if such virtual items may be used only for gameplay and may not be, per the terms of service of the game, transferred, exchanged, or redeemed for money or property.'

The justification for the change is spelled out in each bill as an attempt to protect the state's gaming businesses from lawsuits after two companies based in Washington had class-action lawsuits filed against them. The law doesn't spell out which companies, but it would presumably be the social casino outfits Big Fish Games and Double Down Interactive, both of which have been named in class action complaints since a 2018 court ruling that Big Fish Games' Big Fish Casino qualified as illegal gambling because its virtual currency counted as a 'thing of value.'

While the new legislation deals with the ability of players to cash out virtual items for real-world money, it does not directly reference the primary reason Big Fish Casino was deemed to be illegal in the first place. The judge in the 2018 ruling specifically said the ability to cash out was not the determining factor in virtual currency having value. Instead, the reason Big Fish Casino chips qualified as things of value was how they extended users' privilege of playing the games with more wagers or spins on a slot machine.

The two pieces of pending legislation -- House Bill 2720 and Senate Bill 6568 -- both have bipartisan support, with Democrats and Republicans sponsoring the measures. Both bills are also clear in that their motivation is to protect Washington-based businesses from consumer legal action.

As the legislators wrote in the text of House Bill 2720, 'These lawsuits, if decided adversely to the game companies, pose a substantial financial risk for video game development in this state. The further possibility exists that companies based in Washington will move their base of operations to other states, which would remove thousands of jobs from the state and a currently incalculable, but materially significant, amount of tax dollars.

'Therefore, it is the intent of the legislature to remove this economic uncertainty by clarifying that a player is not entitled to recovery under RCW 4.24.070 unless the video game played provides a mechanism for the withdrawal of money or property from the game.'

The introduction of the bills comes a month after the formation of the Game On WA coalition, a group advocating for free-to-play and social game developers that warns the state legislature must act or else gambling concerns around social games 'could mean game over for a vibrant and growing industry in this state.' Game On WA is co-chaired by former Washington governor Gary Locke, Washington Technology Industry Association CEO Michael Schutzler, and Kristina Hudson, executive director of the OneRedmond economic development group.

Doubledown Casino Complaint Dept

Legally speaking, it seems the Mike Postle case may be wrapped up soon.

On Friday, the same day a Nevada judge dismissed one lawsuit against Postle, CardPlayer reported that the California portion of the case nears its own end. According to the report, based on court documents, Judge William B. Shubb granted the plaintiffs a third extension on filing an amended complaint due to the fact that they're working on a settlement.

Last Chance for Player Restitution

The legal battle by some 80-odd players against alleged cheat Postle and venue in which they played livestreamed poker has come down to this last case.

In addition to the dismissed Nevada case, Judge Shubb had already thrown out many facets of the California case against both Postle and Stones Gambling Hall. He did leave the door cracked open for continued legal machinations by allowing the plaintiffs to amend their complaint, something attorney Mac VerStandig said he would get in motion.

However, it seems that rather than a continued legal war, both sides have been in talks about a settlement.

'Counsel for the parties have reached an agreement as to the principal terms of a settlement of this case, but require additional time to finalize the settlement,' the court document obtained by CardPlayer reads. 'Specifically, inasmuch as there are 88 Plaintiffs in this case, some additional time is needed to communicate with each about final settlement terms and the relative benefits and detriments of accepting such a settlement.'

Next and Final Steps

The chief remaining opportunity for the plaintiffs, which VerStandig outlined in speaking with PokerNews after the California dismissal, is to amend the complaint and target the rake from the livestreamed games in question. The judge requested the plaintiffs specify the amount of rake collected from the games.

Thus, it can be expected the settlement discussions have revolved around this unspecified amount of monies, which could only be brought into focus via long hours of dissecting each streamed game and counting the rake taken.

Double Down Casino Help

Whenever the settlement is finalized, it will represent the likely closure of one of the most talked-about episodes in recent memory in the poker world. Mainstream media up to and including ESPN's 'SportsCenter' dedicated segments of airtime and/or words to the story, but legal movements against Postle and Stones fell far short of the hopes of many in the poker world who vilified those parties.