New complaints policy at Redbet/Mr Green

[maxd]

A while back there was a bit of kerfuffle with Redbet/Mr Green when it came to light that after years of cooperating with Casinomeister on player complaints they would now no longer be doing that. There was some back and forth on this -- them claiming that they would happily "cooperate" regarding complaints but they wouldn't be able to "discuss any details" -- and it ended with them announcing that they'd be starting a new internal department to handle complaints that appear on the various social media "including Casinomeister". Ultimately both casinos were dropped from the Accredited list because of this: see RedBet Casino Review, trusted & updated info - Casinomeister and Mr Green Casino Review, trusted & updated info - Casinomeister for details.

Aside from the fact that Casinomeister is far more than just being "social media" we decided to wait and see what they came up with. Yesterday I heard through our accounts manager that the new department has now been launched:

... It's been a while but finally I would like to introduce you to our Head of Social complaints department ... She and her professional team will be taking care of players complaints and issues coming from social media platforms and of course CasinoMeister being one of them. ...
From our side, we would like to see the creation of the department as a new blank page for our cooperation. I believe it is always necessary to meet each other halfway and agree on certain cooperation points, to have a clear structure of our cooperation. We have come up with some of them which are important from our side:

1.GDPR prevails and we can’t just share player information with you neither details of their claim, or discuss complaints that pertains to our customers whether or not they come through their website. This is the part which I assume was one of the biggest issues in the past and I believe it is very important to mention that no under circumstances we can share the details of the players case. ...

There was more but it boils down to an internal department handling player complaints in isolation from any outside involvement.

Also, regarding the GDPR, note the contrast between their position and my recent article on exactly that subject: Who are the GDPR violators?

So there it is. I'll keep further comments on this to myself for the time being.

 

[colinsunderland]

So nothings changed.
They either don't understand the gdpr (bad) or are using it to avoid allowing a third party to make an unbiased decision (worse)

How do they work with their appointed ADR if they can't share account details with third parties? That's maybe a question any casino claiming this, be asked.

 

[maxd]

How do they work with their appointed ADR if they can't share account details with third parties? That's maybe a question any casino claiming this, be asked.

In the UK at least they have no choice but to work with their designated ADR. What exactly that relationship is I couldn't say.
Elsewhere though ... ah, keeping comments to myself aren't I?

 

[colinsunderland]

In the UK at least they have no choice but to work with their designated ADR. What exactly that relationship is I couldn't say.
Elsewhere though ... ah, keeping comments to myself aren't I?

Yes. But it isn't law that they have to, just a condition of the license isn't it? Therefore if they claim it's a breach of the gdpr to pass case details to a third party, then that breach occurs when they do so to an ADR, as there's no legal obligation that overides the gdpr in this case, assuming they are right in what they are saying.
Of course, we know they are wrong, and that's how there's no breach when using an ADR.
Maybe the rep can chime in here.

 

[Nordog]

How come laws that are ment to protect customers so often get bent over and just ends up being a shield to protect companies. I know they are breaking the intent of the law here, but it must contain some loopholes that fucks us over instead unless im wrong.

 

[maxd]

Yes. But it isn't law that they have to, just a condition of the license isn't it? ...

I believe that is correct.

How come laws that are ment to protect customers so often get bent over and just ends up being a shield to protect companies. ...

L a w y e r s, the corporate species in particular. They are paid to make the law work for the companies that employ them.

 

[Nordog]

Yeah max. I feel like every law EU make to protect "me", just takes away more of my rights.

 

[maxd]

I hear you. IMO the lawmakers are often well-intentioned. The GDPR for instance is, in theory, a pretty good thing for consumers. The problems come fast and furious though when it hits the real world. Those that would manipulate it for their own ends are pretty much free to do so until there is a sufficient body of case history -- meaning court cases and rulings -- in place to give the thing a rudder and some direction.

The same thing happened with the Data Protection Act (DPA) when it came out. See this for instance. Casinos took it to mean all sorts of ridiculous things until the powers that be said "no, that's not allowed" and put some specific guidelines into place on how the thing was to be used and applied. After that the situation improved considerably and the flagrant abuse of it pretty much evaporated.

I fully expect the GDPR will mature over time and eventually the GDPR violators will be slapped back into line. Until then they'll say and do pretty much whatever they like with it, as we are seeing.

Unfortunately the bodies that often provide guidance on such things -- ICO here in the UK for instance -- have been aggravatingly slow to say or do much regarding the proper application of the GDPR. There have been a few rulings regarding outright disregard for the GDPR but not much in the way of official statements regarding its application and interpretation in real-world cases. That may be due to the GDPR's complexity which is considerable.

 

[Nordog]

Thanks for a detailed summary. Isnt gdpr all about controlling your own data? Ifso its quite ridicolous they refuse to share data with the owners consent.

 

[sapit222]

= they are still bad casinos!

 

[maxd]

... Isnt gdpr all about controlling your own data? ...

Sort of. It's most significantly about how and when "data controllers" -- casinos for instance, or us for that matter -- can process, move, use and share consumer's private data for their own benefit. There is precious little detail about how the "data subject" -- in other words the consumer -- can directly control that data flow in real time, or how and when the "data controller" should respond to the "data subject"'s wishes regarding the movement of their data.

Ifso its quite ridicolous they refuse to share data with the owners consent.

On that we most certainly agree.

 

[Nordog]

I appriciate getting some factual information. Really interesting to learn abit about this. ( Basicly Everyone should know this tho, as it concerns Everyone.).

Thanks max