expressman33 wrote:
I took up the offer and played bingo with the free cash until it ran out , but still extended

roger wrote:The trouble with instances such as City Bingo is that typically, by the time the transaction is eventually rejected, the merchant is no longer active and one is forced to rely on memory as to what the transaction actually was. In this particular case, my recollection is that the transaction offered cash/shares for people who clicked onto their site without necessarily taking up the offer to play bingo. As for myself, I took a look and decided "no, thank you". I rather suspect that the merchant then decided not to pay out to those declining the offer. While there's an old maxim about there being no such thing as a free lunch, my recollection is that the merchant's advertising did offer just that, ie. a free lunch. Having said that, if I now pursue the matter, I'm chasing iMutual for money which it hasn't itself received (which means that, indirectly, other members would be subsidising my claim if successful) which doesn't seem altogether the right thing to do. On the other hand, if other members in similar situations (not necessarily with this merchant) do pursue their claims (meaning I then subsidise them!) then maybe I should rethink. Mind you, to get matters into perspective, we're only talking about a fiver. Has this subject been aired before?

Luke_PieStalker wrote:How do you check the status of claims if such a need would arise? I know Q & TCB have a ticket/claim sections which is easy to find but where is Imutuals?

roger wrote:The trouble with instances such as City Bingo is that typically, by the time the transaction is eventually rejected, the merchant is no longer active and one is forced to rely on memory as to what the transaction actually was. In this particular case, my recollection is that the transaction offered cash/shares for people who clicked onto their site without necessarily taking up the offer to play bingo. As for myself, I took a look and decided "no, thank you". I rather suspect that the merchant then decided not to pay out to those declining the offer. While there's an old maxim about there being no such thing as a free lunch, my recollection is that the merchant's advertising did offer just that, ie. a free lunch. Having said that, if I now pursue the matter, I'm chasing iMutual for money which it hasn't itself received (which means that, indirectly, other members would be subsidising my claim if successful) which doesn't seem altogether the right thing to do. On the other hand, if other members in similar situations (not necessarily with this merchant) do pursue their claims (meaning I then subsidise them!) then maybe I should rethink. Mind you, to get matters into perspective, we're only talking about a fiver. Has this subject been aired before?