I bet someone reviews the tapes. Now whether the casino’s policy towards accidental negligent loss is the same as the one at Tesco, I have no idea, but I expect Dead Badger’s windfall will be noticed.
If a casino has 10 tables, it has 10 cameras (one for each table) running at all times—Do you actually think a casino hires someone (or 10 someones) to review each tables video for each night???
Unless something is amiss, those tapes are re-recorded over each night, until something happens to give the casino reason to take a closer look at a specific recording…
I have heard of stores restricting the purchase of sale items, but the principle there is to be fair to other customers, I think. That particular situation is not analogous, anyway, because the store chooses to offer items for sale in order to make more money than they would otherwise.
It’s an elegant argument, and I don’t want to turn the thread into a general debate about ethics (for one thing, I’m sure that has been done to death on here already), but I’m not sure I agree. The simplest counter-argument is to ask how you know when it is wrong - the “how many books make a library” argument.
I think that is extremely unlikely. What’s in it for the dealer (unless they want to lose their job pretty quickly)?
I think I agree with this. On the other hand, I have now banked the money (perhaps temporarily) and am still undecided.
Funnily enough, I used to work on a till at Tesco, and I was once conned out of £20 by a customer. It was not docked from my wages (helped no doubt by the fact that the same person had just accomplished the same thing at another supermarket down the road. They radioed us, too late). The point still stands that it is very unlikely this mistake will be docked from the dealer’s wages unless the tape is reviewed, which is very unlikely in itself.
That would be the case if I gambled it, won, and kept the winnings. What I meant was, gambling it until I lost it all, thus putting the money back in the “right” place. But it does seem stupid to me - why shouldn’t I just be up-front about doing that, if that is what I want to do?
Agreed, summed this up nicely.
I’m flattered to be confused with Dead Badger, but I’m his compatriot (or “fellow roadkill”, as we were once described, but in fact I chose my username on a quite different basis) Dead Cat. For reading his posts, it appears he knows more than me about almost everything, so I take this as a compliment.
I’ve seen it happen many times. Mistakes in the player’s favor should be caught at the time it happens by the dealer. If the casino sees it later on film, the dealer gets reprimanded. If you had pointed out the mistake, the dealer would still get reprimanded.
Having thought about this a bit more, the two situations are actually not quite the same. In the case of taking free goods from Tesco due to an error in payment, the company has actually made a physical loss, which costs them something. In my case, I have not caused the casino to make a loss, they have just failed to win. The situation for them is the same as if I had never made that particular bet in the first place. True, I then won a subsequent bet, but this was a separate event.
I think that on balance, I’m going to let greed get the better of me and keep the money, based on the balance of the arguments in this thread. I hope some people found the exercise as interesting as I did!
You owe us all a beer. When do we collect?
If someone got fired or disciplined due to the mistake, returning the money isn’t going to save them. If not, then by returning the money you’re only hurting these people. You go to turn it in then they’ll review tape (which can be a bitch in and of itself), question the dealer on why they screwed up. Question the floor as to why they didn’t catch it and weren’t watching. Question YOU as to why you didn’t return the money right away. You’re likely to cause more trouble than you solve.
It’s just more trouble than it’s worth. Keep the money.
Dead Cat,
I didn’t vote, because I honestly have ambivalent feelings here. I can see the logic in both arguments for and against most of the options you’ve posited.
But what I do want to say, is this:
I applaud you for even pondering the question and seeking others’ input. The fact that you bothered to post this, and are concerned enough to be open to suggestions, indicates that you are, whether you realize it or not, a pretty ethical person.
Nowadays, it seems, even acknowledging a moral grey area, is something of a victory.
Hope it all works out in your favor.
I consider this to be equivalent to scamming, and I don’t agree that you’re justified in keeping the money just because it was from a casino. Casino’s may give bad odds, but they don’t cheat you, and they don’t force anyone to gamble. If the dealer had made a mistake causing your 100 to be removed before the first spin I guarantee you wouldn’t have just shrugged and said “I gambled that the dealer wouldn’t make a mistake, and lost”. This is straight up angleshooting imo.
Keep it without a moment’s hesitation. The casino is going to miss it a lot less than I am.
This is my opinion as well. Giving it back will likely result in them noticing something was wrong, and thus actually have negative consequences. The only proper way to give it back would be to gamble it away.
I really do not see how this makes a difference. 18/37 times the casino will make a loss, balanced by the 18.5/37 they make as profit. Although you personally didn’t effect anybody else’s “luck”, by letting a losing bet ride you have messed with their probability model and stolen the £100 chip that is the casinos rightful property.
Having said that, although I voted “Tell the Manager” in the poll, I think I agree with the people saying that what’s done is done and will only cause trouble so keep the money.
I think this is the strongest argument so far in favour of keeping the money (even if the possibility of personal harm to me is discounted) - and from a professional, too! I daresay the casino will win it’s money back sooner or later (or indeed, I could argue, already has done - I’m not under the illusion that I am ahead over the last few years that I have gambled there).
Thanks, I hope so too!
I agree with this post except the first clause and last sentence. I never intended to scam the casino, and I think that nearly everyone in the same situation would have acted similarly. I just can’t see anyone pointing out the error to the dealer at the time - if you think you would have done, you’re probably way too righteous to be in a casino in the first place :).
Consider these four situations: you do not go shopping; you go shopping and obtain £100 of free goods due to an error; you do not place a bet; you place a losing bet and get it back due to an error. Comparing the first two cases, in one case the shop is no better or worse off than it was before (except for the lost profit), whereas in the other the shop has lost physical goods that have a cost to the shop. Comparing the second two cases, they are the same (except for the lost profit). Granted, the profit margin is different in each case, but I do not believe that is morally relevant. This is why I feel that the analogy is not quite sound.
OK, I disagree. But lets say you went to Tesco at 21:30 on a Saturday as they were about to close, and bought nothing but goods that had a Sell By date of today. Again you accidentally receive your £100 back. Is this morally similar to you?
You may not have planned it from the get-go, but when the dealer handed you the £200 you knew there had been a mistake, and you chose not to alert them about the error because it worked out in your favor. If the error had been in your disfavor you would certainly have spoken up. I’m having a hard time not seeing this as angleshooting.
The fact that the victim in this case is a casino is pure justification, and morally irrelevant. Casinos don’t cheat their customers. They provide a clearly laid out service that people voluntarily pay for, and they follow their own rules to the letter, even when they lose. They’re a service provider like any other, and leaving their premises with £200 that you know do not rightfully belong to you is clearly immoral.
Uh… imo.
And yes, I would have told the dealer he made a mistake.