SE Question

Anguskhan

Registered
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Location
england
Hi i am looking for some information about SE issue i am having i basically SE from Leo Vegas on 26th September 2018 as i saw i was gambling to much to wanted to take a break from it now and i gain i like to top up and play well basically i made an account with 21.co.uk on 17th January 2020 credit my account with £1300 over the next few days lost it so i decided i would SE while looking up how to do this i came across the fact they are owned by Leo Vegas which did surprise me i thought 21.co.uk where from UK not Malta owned so my question is should i challenged this and ask for my money back i read threw the rules and it states if your SE with Leo Vegas you should not be able to make other accounts with they companies they own i used all same details as i did when i registered with Leo Vegas so i am wondering how my account was not flagged up on 21.co.uk and banned before i could credit my account

Just to make this clear i am just asking if i have a case i not trying to scam/con or lie to get my money back i was going to SE after losing i just found out while doing this that 21.co.uk are owned or ran by Leo Vegas i feel i should not been able to credit my account i just can not understand while making a new account with 21.co.uk that my details have not flagged up on their system
 
Last edited:

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
You should get your deposits back assuming you did you the exact same details. Have you spoken with support?
 

Harry_BKK

Meister Member
CAG
mm1
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Location
Balcony
Are you saying, that you didn't see this?

1579801370992.png

Or this?

1579801344957.png

Are you buying a house without a survey or reading through the contract? Or a car without a test drive? Or a TV without checking anything? Or sign any contract whatsoever without reading the terms? :rolleyes:

Of course, they should have flagged your new registration if your SE at LeoVegas was still active but it looks like they didn't for some reason. What time period did you set for the SE? 12 months maybe? Because then it had expired when you registered with 21.co.uk

I find it totally amazing how many people find out that casinos are connected only after they lost their deposits. Truly amazing! :rolleyes:
 

L&L-Jan

Affiliate Manager for Accredited Casinos
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Location
Malta
Im starting to enjoy @Harry_BKK comments a lot lately, just pointing that out :)
 

snorky510238

Chief glockenspiel maker
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Location
Uk
Not saying for a second that I agree with the morals of people constantly going down this route but if your system has loop holes there a is going to be a percentage of people looking to exploit it.

That’s human nature, if their system was bullet proof it would eliminate this from happening. This is assuming that all details were the same of course, which admittedly is a big assumption in most cases.
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
Not saying for a second that I agree with the morals of people constantly going down this route but if your system has loop holes there a is going to be a percentage of people looking to exploit it.

That’s human nature, if their system was bullet proof it would eliminate this from happening. This is assuming that all details were the same of course, which admittedly is a big assumption in most cases.
Heres the thing though, we have the casinos, in cases like this, where they keep telling us, if the details don't match 100% they won't detect an existing SE. Then in other threads we are told age verification can be carried out if there are errors as there is always a margin for error. So which is it, 100% match or say 80% match? They can't have it both ways! Funny how when it comes to self exclusion they find it extremely hard to match existing customers, yet when its age verification they find it very easy to verify. Both are in the favour of the casino.
 

snorky510238

Chief glockenspiel maker
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Location
Uk
In these situations we always look at it from the players side in as much as they can’t lose but at the same time they can’t win either. Unless something slips through the net when they withdraw.

Casinos can win in this situation though because there must be some players that genuinely don’t realise their SE applies so if they lose they don’t give it a second thought but if they win they only get their deposit back.

This begs the question are casinos purposely leaving the gate unlocked therefore putting themselves in a no lose situation?
 

colinsunderland

Experienced Member
webmeister
MM
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Location
uk
In these situations we always look at it from the players side in as much as they can’t lose but at the same time they can’t win either. Unless something slips through the net when they withdraw.

Casinos can win in this situation though because there must be some players that genuinely don’t realise their SE applies so if they lose they don’t give it a second thought but if they win they only get their deposit back.

This begs the question are casinos purposely leaving the gate unlocked therefore putting themselves in a no lose situation?
I certainly think that is the case with the LV group, due to there being so many complaints. Considering how few people use forums, imagine how many people are affected on a daily basis who don't post on forums. Add to that, its only after a fight they refund deposits, something that should be done without question, so there must be thousands who the casino have profited from.

Also, I don't care what casinos say, if they can detect a SE'd player on withdrawal, then they can detect that same SE on deposit, especially now when they legally have to complete more checks at the start of the customer journey. If they complete a successful age verification check, they must have the correct name, address and DOB. Having just a name and address should be enough to detect an existing SE in those cases where someone hasn't moved house. It's in the casinos interest not to detect an existing SE at an early stage, and clearly some don't try.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top