1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Herogaming, not acting as accredited casino!

Discussion in 'Quit Gambling' started by Valerius, Nov 20, 2017.

    Nov 20, 2017
  1. Valerius

    Valerius Member PABnononaccred

    Location:
    N/A
    Normally you read good stories about Herogaming, not this one. Clear breach of law.

    TO EVERYONE READING THIS, LET ME BE CLEAR LEGALLY BASED ON MGA LAW of 2004, WHICH IS STILL VALID UNTILL NEW GAMING LAW 2018, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PROVIDE A REASON FOR EXCLUSION. THEIR IS NO DEFINITION IN MGA LAW OR PUBLICLY KNOWN POLICY/ JURISPRUDENCE ON MGA SITE OF THE MEANING OF THE WORD. WHEN THERE IS NOT SUCH EXPLANATION A BROAD MEANING APPLIES, IN EVERY LAW, WHICH MEANS EVERY CLOSURE!!!!! YOU DON'T HAVE TO STATE GAMBLING PROBLEMS!!
    ALSO THUS ON EVERY REOPENING THEY NEED TO APPLY 7 DAYS WAITING.
    THEREFORE A LOT OF RESPONSIBLE GAMING POLICIES IN CASINO TERMS CANNOT UPHOLD EITHER SINCE THEY BREACH THE LAW!

    DON'T LET THEM TELL YOU OTHERWISE. LEGALLY YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO UPHOLD YOUR CLAIM. READ art 43 of MGA!


    My story.
    I had an exclusion at Casino heroes and was able to write up at Betser while excluded of their license by saying exclusion of Casino Heroes. They say at the time my closure was not stated as gamble problems, but ofcourse it was to me, even when not stated.

    I see a TREND in casino communication by the way, they immediately throw this line in the first response:

    "After investigating your account thouroughly we decide not.... this is our final decision"

    They do not give you arguments which uphold legally, they simply ignore your fair arguments, although the bad casino do!

    Did they all get the same communication course? Hahahahaha -;)

    Well Herogaming should lose some credits here at Casinomeister since they don't apply their MGA license law, which says:

    1) Header financial protection of players (not responsible gaming) and then Art 43.1 you exclude from the LICENSE.
    You don't have to give a REASON for exclusion in this article.

    The bad licensees like EVERYMATRIX ( who never respond to your complaint) explain this rule that you need to indicate you have gambling problems. I see people saying this on CM forum many times as well, But this is written NOWHERE in MGA rules!!! And now HEROGAMING says so as well, but can not give a LAW based opinion about this. THEY CHOSE not to answer anymore, that states they don't have arguments and are wrong !!!

    You exclude from THE LICENSE if you decide to exclude no REASON has to be given. So every other casinobrand should lock the new account immediately after writing up!!!

    2) then herogaming says to me: you are correct if you want to reopen your account on casino heroes instead of Betser, then 7 waiting days apply. But by saying that I refer again to art 43 now 2 and 3 which CLEARLY says at a LICENSE! So if not preventing from writing up on the LICENSE a waiting period of 7 days applies to ALL casino's of their License.

    Then Herogaming says their term:
    8.7
    Any self-exclusion request would be valid for the brand you are currently a member of (for example CasinoHeroes.com) only and does not include other sites operated by us.
    You must register/login in order to see the link.

    This term clearly contradicts the MGA law which says LICENSE and which says EXCLUSION not self exclusion.

    All casino's who say you need to say you have gambling problems are most of the time LEGALLY INCORRECT.
    Beside from the MORAL aspects of letting you write up ofcourse knowing you excluded at another brand of theirs.

    The good casino's prevent you from writing up on the start!!

    So HEROGAMING check your legally procedures and most of all the MORAL procedures! Do you think this is FAIR PLAY?

    HEROGAMING I dare you here to provide in this discussion law based arguments please how, you can uphold this? So easy not to reply anymore..

    Casinomeister, HEROGAMING does not apply MGA ruling!

    Ps I'll send a message to the rep personally so he reads this.

    Greetz!!!
     
  2. Nov 20, 2017
  3. Valerius

    Valerius Member PABnononaccred

    Location:
    N/A
    Other casinos about this subject

    Do you know casino's who handle this matter well, immediately or finally?
    Let me say some who handle it well:
    * videoslots (no wonder pole position)
    * betsson group
    * alea gaming (slots millions)
    * the Palaces

    And some who are so unethical in this matters, that you can't even imagine....
    * casino cruise (they are so incredibly terrible in handling , even though they have a nice rep, why are they still accredited, they have had so many complaints about everything, soon I'll write a piece on them, cause in my experience this is one of the WORST)
    * Spinit
    [strike]* lucky casino ( don't respond to casinomeister at all)[/strike]

    What is your experience????
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 23, 2017
  4. Nov 20, 2017
  5. Valerius

    Valerius Member PABnononaccred

    Location:
    N/A
    I forget the worst licensee, besides casino cruise: everymatrix

    How can I forget everymatrix with their 60 casino's of which are a lot unknown. Luckily I think new MGA law will prevent 1 license for them all, If I am correct.
     
  6. Nov 22, 2017
  7. CasinoHeroesRep

    CasinoHeroesRep Official Rep for Heroes Casino

    Occupation:
    Senior Affiliate Manager
    Location:
    Malta
    Hi,

    Just to clarify here, both CasinoHeroes and Betser do indeed share the same license. We also currently have a process internally, so that if a customer should self-exclude on one brand they will immediately be prevented from creating any further accounts on any of our other brands.

    However, as I explained to you directly through CM, our records show that you requested account closure on your first account due to a lack of bonuses and our records do not indicate or show any mentioning of gambling problems. When you requested account closure for gambling problems on your second account, all accounts where blocked immediately and you will not be able to create any future accounts on any of our brands that share the same license.

    I hope this sheds some light on the matter and we are sorry to hear of your dissatisfaction here.

    Thanks,
    Phil.
     
  8. Nov 22, 2017
  9. Valerius

    Valerius Member PABnononaccred

    Location:
    N/A
    Hi Phil,

    Thanks for answering here! Very good you now are creating a policy on SE accounts across brands, but it should be compliant with law applicable today! Which is not selfexclusion across brands, but exclusion across brands, but perhaps it might change with mga laws 2018, but for now it still would not be compliant as well when you change your term 8.7 when you implement SE. So perhaps you can bring this up in your staff meetings?

    If MGA is for example advising towards gamblers and casinos, that art 43 is only for troubled gamblers, then they should have adjusted the 2004 law on that point, which they did not obviously, or they need to publish policy/ jurisprudence publicly known on their website about it, which they did not either, so MGA obviously sticks to their laws on this point, so rest my case: EVERY CLOSURE is meant by art 43 MGA. Every casino on the license who has not implemented this in their terms is non-compliant!!

    It means as well MGA should regulate on this point, as they state they protect registered players financially, I do not know if they do at this point, but they probably will when possible, since that is their job, but they don’t publish their complaints at player support and a lot of regulated casino terms still are not compliant on this point by known law.

    But anyway, Phil, your answer is still not an answer to my started thread, I want to know how your casino is compliant on this point law based? Perhaps there is a MGA policy on this we do not publicly know of?????

    I would really appreciate it if you could provide an answer and shed some more lights on this matter instead of leaving me in the dark-;)



    as I mailed you this in the PM:

    Hi Phil,

    Thx for responding that fast!
    The information is incorrect. I permanently excluded in 2016 on casino heroes.
    That is just the point as you can see in my post on CM.
    You dont need to mention the reason according to law: MGA law only says you have the right to exclude...
    MGA law also says from a LICENSE.

    So if I want to be excluded from playing, which I wanted, the exclusion also goes for Betser.
    You can say in your terms you don’t but that is legally in contradictio with MGA law, in these cases LAW prevail.

    Then on reopening on the license, Yes art 43.3 says license 7 waiting days apply.

    So the right thing to do of your casino was 1) prevent from writing up cause excluded from the license, 2) apply 7 waiting days when I really did want reopening of the LICENSE.

    If MGA law ment casino it would not have said LICENCE
    If MGA law ment exclusion because of gambling troubles, it would have said so as well. No definition of exclusion is given anywhere, so a broad explanation applies legally, that means EVERY closure.

    But I understand you stand by your collegues, but they don’t know the law. I am right here 100% for sure. I own a law degree.

    So I feel I did not get a legally based argument from your team.
    Perhaps it’s a lack of knowledge on the subject, but do not end conversation then without a good explanation and set a wall for the customer.

    Would be nice if you guys checked it, I know your casino is doing a great job mostly, instead of others who are accredited here as well, that’s why your legal department should change that term to be compliant to law.

    I am sorry, but my claim is justified...

    Greetz!!
     
  10. Nov 22, 2017
  11. CasinoHeroesRep

    CasinoHeroesRep Official Rep for Heroes Casino

    Occupation:
    Senior Affiliate Manager
    Location:
    Malta
    Hi,

    Just to clarify a bit further here, the process I mentioned earlier has been in place every since we opened our second brand and it is not something that we have just recently added.

    If you feel that you are still being treated unfairly then by all means you are well within your rights to make a complaint directly to the MGA. As I mentioned earlier though, our records show the original account closure was made due to a lack of bonuses being issued to you. If you have evidence that proves otherwise, as I say, you are more than within your rights to make a complaint.

    Thanks again.
    Phil.
     
  12. Nov 22, 2017
  13. Valerius

    Valerius Member PABnononaccred

    Location:
    N/A

    Hi Phil,

    Sorry to hear I do not get an law based answer here and I am guided to MGA. The proof is the law!! Plus you ignore the 7 waiting days on reopening at a Licensee. There is so much confusion for gamblers on the SE matter, and one of the reasons in my opinion is just this point, not providing answers and reference to an authority who do not publish their handled complaints. People left in the dark and therefore so much discussion on this matter on every fora. Casino’s do contribute to this problem.....
    I think good casino names, like yourselves, can distinguish themselves from other casino’s by clearly explaining how they act compliant to (potential) clients on fora, or who are really even stronger when they admit, they are also humans and make mistakes-;) It will rise trustworthiness.
    Therefore, I am sorry, saying go to MGA is WEAKNESS and in my opinion that is a ultimum remedium besides a law suit.
    OR MAYBY THERE IS A POLICY WE AS PLAYERS DO NOT KNOW PUBLICLY, SOME CASINO’S FEEL PROTECTED BY? Probably just a crazy thought of me.

    But I am always open for a fair discussion or compromise and if you prefer in PM.

    PS By the way I did once go to MGA player support and they told me art 43 is valid for every closure, if you like I can send it to you PM?? since it contains my private data
     
  14. Nov 23, 2017
  15. Valerius

    Valerius Member PABnononaccred

    Location:
    N/A
    Rubbish: state you have gambling problems

    See my new thread
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2017
  16. Nov 23, 2017
  17. maxd

    maxd Complaints (PAB) Manager Staff Member

    Occupation:
    The PAB Guy
    Location:
    Saltirelandia
    Not true. Please stop saying this because it is 100% false.
     
  18. Nov 23, 2017
  19. Valerius

    Valerius Member PABnononaccred

    Location:
    N/A
    I am sorry maxd that was from yesterday: the correct words from your mail of 5th September were:

    ‘The casino has told us that they won't discuss your case with us. Unfortunately that leaves us with no chance to assist you further and we'll have to close your PAB.
    The casino said the same to us that they said to you: take your complaint directly to the Malta authorities.’

    Upon I went to MGA immediately.

    I am wrong about stating them not contacting you at all, later after I mailed them I went to MGA. You mailed me they contacted you. my complaint was at MGA already, on which output I totally agree on, since it was not a matter for their authority, but for consumer law.

    So I was wrong they eventually did contact you, but shut the door down at first. Apologies!!!
    I want to remove it, but I found out I only can edit last post?
    Oh see you did that, thx.
     

Share This Page