In a message dated 10/11/2006 5:58:50 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
kelso1600@hotmail.com writes:
Is this something that you have done or known someone to do?
A comp is a gift to a certain degree. Don't understand how you can take a
casino to court over that. In addition, it sounds like the amount involved is
less than $100.
If you can verify that you are treated in a manner that does not follow the
organization's policy, and in fact you are treated in a differential manner
than other casino customers in the same set of circumstances, you have a matter
that can be argued in a court of law. If the comp is understood to be a
condition of your gambling, one where there is a meeting of the minds--in other
words your understanding of the comp is the same understanding that the casino
holds--you have a definite litigatable argument.
Is it worth a small claim battle? That is up to the litigant as it is always
an uphill unpredictable matter to go to any court but especially a small
claims court. Small claims courts do not often allow you sufficient time to
present your evidence and argument, plus the trier of facts is often times a
pro-tem judge or attorney who will not be up to date on all law without some
research.
The critical issue is if she can verify the above, i.e., was there an
understanding about the comp, is it policy, did she get short changed, etc. Verify
and document--In a later email I read that it is custom and practice in most
casinos to debt you your entire comp. If that is so--you have a real uphill
battle in a litigation arena. Custom and practice is a great defense for any
defendant. As I said in my earlier email, the matter is quite small and you
have to weigh your time, out of pocket costs and frustration against a possible
loss and such a small recovery. But it might surprise you--most people do
NOT go to court (either small or Superior-or the supreme court) primarily for
money. In almost all cases it is a principle they want to establish that
drives them through such an adventure.
China
China
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]