The problem is that if you bend the rules for one, you have to do it for everyone....and if they didn't, they would cop it from those who were held to the rules, so they can't win either way.
Understand the rules and follow them. Simple.
They ARE bending the rules. They say that the faxback form only needs sending once, yet they appear to be asking a number of players to send it again because the original is "too old". The rules are clearly different to those stated, and in reality they are wanting regular updates of players' verification documents.
This tale:-
They recently requested a completed fax back form although I have been a member for years and already had a faxback approved and have successfully withdrawn.
I complained they were breaking their terms, as their terms page cleary states
Players are only required to send this form in once.
Too bad they said. I bitched and moaned some more and they wouldn't budge. So I finally bit the bullet and filled out a new form.
Now I find they have bonus banned me. I'm a net loser Inetbet, your loss.
They clearly wanted to bonus ban this player, but rather than going ahead with it, they first had to jerk them around about documents, which of course made the player angry, and THEN they issued the bonus ban.
Despite iNetBet always claiming that their email response times are so good that nothing else is needed, there are REPEATED complaints of either no response, or a delayed response. This means that there is no way to have "urgent" issues dealt with, as answers can arrive too late to be of any use.
If email replies keep ending up in spam filters, it's because they are not designed properly, and have too much in common with spam emails.
Proper design of emails should stop them from ending up in spam filters. the email headers also play a part in this, and non-standard or bogus information in headers can also cause spam filters to reject an email as spam based on inconsistencies between header information and authentication databases for email servers.
My spam filter sometimes blocks casino mails because it flags up "this may not be from the sender stated. (in the header information)" It even "red flags" such emails as "dangerous".