I'm not sure you understand addiction. The point of SE is to stop people with problems or addictions being able to stop because they don't have the will power to do it themselves. The nature of addiction will mean if one avenue is blocked, they will try another. Just like if a coke dealer goes out of business, then the punters will find another one, not stop taking it. This is why Gamstop is a great idea, and when fully live should stop situations like this. However, if a casino knowingly allows a player with a self admitted problem/addicted to continue playing then they are the problem too. You can talk about responsibility forever, but unless you have had an addiction you cannot possibly know how strong the urge is too keep going with it. I worked with people with addictions for years, in one on one and group scenarios (not gambling related) and I don't understand them completely, but do know, some of them would do anything to get a fix, opening a webpage and signing up for another casino is not hard!
The fact is, the casino are in the wrong here, the law backs that up, and to demonstrate how serious these types of failings are, look at the size of recent UKGC fines. I think the player should be paid back net deposits, I'm not so sure that will happen, but certainly LV should be held accountable for this, either by doing so, or by way of another large fine by the UKGC for allowing problem gamblers to gamble for almost 3 months after being made aware that they had a problem.