Self Exclusion: 32Red vs. RedBet

[Balthazar]

Just self excluded from these 2 casinos:

RedBet: Log into account, click responsible gaming link, click self exclude for 6 months, done. I can no longer log in. Took a few seconds.

32Red: Find the page through Google, on the page they tell me to send an email along with my name, account number and date of birth. I did that (even though I didn't like the process) and then received a rather long reply from support basically telling me to go fill out another form unlisted on the website (hmm?). It's asking me for my full name, address, postal code, phone number, date of birth and I have to agree to some terms before I'm even able to send that long form.

I did all that and now I have to wait 48 hrs for "review" (what?)

This is unacceptable in my book. 32Red is really lagging behind when it comes to self exclusion.

 

[aceking123]

Just self excluded from these 2 casinos:

RedBet: Log into account, click responsible gaming link, click self exclude for 6 months, done. I can no longer log in. Took a few seconds.

32Red: Find the page through Google, on the page they tell me to send an email along with my name, account number and date of birth. I did that (even though I didn't like the process) and then received a rather long reply from support basically telling me to go fill out another form unlisted on the website (hmm?). It's asking me for my full name, address, postal code, phone number, date of birth and I have to agree to some terms before I'm even able to send that long form.

I did all that and now I have to wait 48 hrs for "review" (what?)

This is unacceptable in my book. 32Red is really lagging behind when it comes to self exclusion.

hmmm seems odd . ive just closed the 32red today ,pi$$ed off with the slots & stuff more of a rage quit though , anyway spoke with live chat it shall be done within 72 hours )

i think its so they can review your account & proceed via proper channels

 

[Balthazar]

hmmm seems odd . ive just closed the 32red today ,pi$$ed off with the slots & stuff more of a rage quit though , anyway spoke with live chat it shall be done within 72 hours )

i think its so they can review your account & proceed via proper channels

What?
They don't need to review shit, they need to instantly block my account (and yours) on request.

 

[aceking123]

What?
They don't need to review shit, they need to instantly block my account (and yours) on request.

doesnt make any odds to me i shall wait as i no doubt this is the final closure & wont be going back, now i only have two down loaded casino left & thats with casino rewards , pity i cannot win at red i can claw some funds back but last ten sessions results all the same far to many spins to trigger a feature of crap money. so time to move on )

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

32Red: Find the page through Google, on the page they tell me to send an email along with my name, account number and date of birth. I did that (even though I didn't like the process) and then received a rather long reply from support basically telling me to go fill out another form unlisted on the website (hmm?). It's asking me for my full name, address, postal code, phone number, date of birth and I have to agree to some terms before I'm even able to send that long form.

I did all that and now I have to wait 48 hrs for "review" (what?)

Hi Balthazar,

Firstly I am sorry to hear you are having difficulty controlling your gambling. Our team can provide you with links to help you, alternatively if you want to drop me a PM I will obtain these for you.

I am a little concerned by your post as the process you have posted doesn't match our internal policy. Once your self exclusion form has been recieved, the account will be locked immediately. Any self exclusion will then be passed to our responsible gaming team who will follow up with you to provide any assistance, as mentioned above. It is this process, due to them not working 24/7, that can take up to 48hrs. Could this be the confusion? Have you tried accessing the account?

I would appreciate a PM with your username so I can investigate this for you.

Take care.
Mark

 

[dunover]

Yes, 32red don't have an automated system unfortunately. I did it once years ago, on live chat. I had to submit an e-mail with DOB/ac. no etc. I was then told I'd receive an e-mail within 48hours confirming my SE period bah blah, which I did. Yes, the system needs to be self-administered in line with virtually all other sites.
When the period expires, unlike most sites you are not automatically allowed to log -in and carry on as before, you need to contact them to re-open and make a statement that you don't have any issues and set a DL etc. which is good for RG.

 

[aceking123]

just to say thanks to mark for nice e mail ( pm ) shows a good side of 32RED

 

[Deeplay]

Got to say that I feel there is no excuse at all these days for not having an automated system where you can with a couple of clicks either SE or initiate a cooling off period. Along with setting deposit limits daily / weekly. WH for example you can only set certain limits and for anything else you have to go through live support. I do not like this at all as it does not place me in direct control of my gambling which is what any worthy company who does see value in having a robust RG policy should allow. So there is no excuse. That has been enough for me to not play further at certain sites inc WH.

Example took a beating at Guts the other day. Have not closed my account but set my deposit limits real low for a while. And I will defo return to them when im ready. Go figure )

Video slots betspin guts etc all have 1 or 2 click RS functions which i use and it means they dont actually loose me as a customer because when im ready to play again after a break I will choose those sites I feel I have the ability to set my own limits. Think they are a number of big casinos that really need to do more on this issue. Having to email support is simply not good enough today. SE should be instant from the moment a player decides they either need a break or need to quit for good. Anything less is not a true responsible gambling policy in my opinion. Rant over .

 

[incrediblestuff]

Let me say something tongue in cheek here: of course 32Red lags behind in self exclusion, but that is simply because no-one in their right mind would want to self exclude from there

On a more serious note i don't think it really matters: if a player really is fed up/has sever disciplinary issues, i think that even in a scenario where it would take up to those 72 hours, any mistake the player would make in that time, meaning possible deposits during that pending time (if that is even the case, i assume Balthazar hasn't tried to make a deposit during this time?), i bet 32Red would then still end up doing the right thing. I also think that the longer more complicated process is o.k., since it shouldn't be a process you start on a whim, as mrjones gave an example of rage quit, and there are more such instances where players are mad, self exclude, then later are sorry, but aren't taken back.. where it may be good for the Casino to let the player cool off, and submit their info with a clear head, so the decision is more thought through.

We saw loads of self excluding issues recently with the everymatrix, and a lot of these issues where because players self-excluded way to easily, i.e, not because of problems, but simply because they lost or where mad at support or whatever.. Anyway, there's always a bit of difference in perspective, and i think it's ok to credit a Casino for speedy withdrawals, but less ok to discredit one for having a slow but thorough self exclusion process...

 

[dunover]

Let me say something tongue in cheek here: of course 32Red lags behind in self exclusion, but that is simply because no-one in their right mind would want to self exclude from there

On a more serious note i don't think it really matters: if a player really is fed up/has sever disciplinary issues, i think that even in a scenario where it would take up to those 72 hours, any mistake the player would make in that time, meaning possible deposits during that pending time (if that is even the case, i assume Balthazar hasn't tried to make a deposit during this time?), i bet 32Red would then still end up doing the right thing. I also think that the longer more complicated process is o.k., since it shouldn't be a process you start on a whim, as mrjones gave an example of rage quit, and there are more such instances where players are mad, self exclude, then later are sorry, but aren't taken back.. where it may be good for the Casino to let the player cool off, and submit their info with a clear head, so the decision is more thought through.

We saw loads of self excluding issues recently with the everymatrix, and a lot of these issues where because players self-excluded way to easily, i.e, not because of problems, but simply because they lost or where mad at support or whatever.. Anyway, there's always a bit of difference in perspective, and i think it's ok to credit a Casino for speedy withdrawals, but less ok to discredit one for having a slow but thorough self exclusion process...

Yes, a few valid points but nowhere did Balthazar say he had a gambling issue - if a site doesn't have an easy 'take a break' option whereby they can simply let you bar the account for say 30 days and log-in after and carry on as before, then SE is the only way to achieve this. Spin genie have an excellent system which has 2 separate drop-downs clearly marked 'break' (which gives a choice up to 60 days from 1 day IIRC) and 'SE' which goes from 3 months upwards.

I have never had an online gambling issue but use the break/SE menus to select on a rolling basis which 6-8 sites I play at at any one time. I am currently SE'd from Guts and Bet-at and Grosvenor, 3 sites which I am well ahead on which the reps could confirm. As they become available to deposit at again, I will break/SE from some of those I play at now. For me it's a 'peace of mind' thing knowing I can manage myself which sites I play at, and don't need to worry about any hacking or funny stuff at the sites I'm not currently depositing at. Plus it controls the amount of e-mails I receive.

I appreciate the 32red rep replying here but I think it's a bit presumptive to state as he did Balt has some sort of issue whereas if Balt could have just used a 'break' menu as described above this thread wouldn't exist and no-one would be the wiser.

 

[incrediblestuff]

Yes, a few valid points but nowhere did Balthazar say he had a gambling issue - if a site doesn't have an easy 'take a break' option whereby they can simply let you bar the account for say 30 days and log-in after and carry on as before, then SE is the only way to achieve this. Spin genie have an excellent system which has 2 separate drop-downs clearly marked 'break' (which gives a choice up to 60 days from 1 day IIRC) and 'SE' which goes from 3 months upwards.

I have never had an online gambling issue but use the break/SE menus to select on a rolling basis which 6-8 sites I play at at any one time. I am currently SE'd from Guts and Bet-at and Grosvenor, 3 sites which I am well ahead on which the reps could confirm. As they become available to deposit at again, I will break/SE from some of those I play at now. For me it's a 'peace of mind' thing knowing I can manage myself which sites I play at, and don't need to worry about any hacking or funny stuff at the sites I'm not currently depositing at. Plus it controls the amount of e-mails I receive.

I appreciate the 32red rep replying here but I think it's a bit presumptive to state as he did Balt has some sort of issue whereas if Balt could have just used a 'break' menu as described above this thread wouldn't exist and no-one would be the wiser.

I see what you mean, but let me point out that i didn't imply he had a problem either, i just assumed he did not try to deposit to see if he still could.

Reason for that is of course, that if he could not, then their system works just as fine as Redbet's, or any other's, but is, like i said more thorough.

(as i stated above IF he could then i am sure 32Red would refund those depo's)


I think Mark may have said that because 32Red's system of self exclusion is focused on problem Gamblers, and assumed that if Balthazar closed it for "minor reasons", he may have first sought contact with either Mark or Johnathan or Pat,

We could delve further into that, but purely based on what's written so far, i think my statement holds up, in terms of being just an opinion anyway ;p

I also appreciate what you do with those S/E and D/L tools, but i think for that reason 32Red also has deposit limits in place.. if not in the software, then certainly on request. This means that to take a break, he could set his limits to 0, for as long as he didn't want to return.

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

Hi Guys,

Just a quick follow-up based on the recent comments.

Apologies for assuming that the OP had a problem with gambling. It's just that's how we classify a SE internally. We have take a break and you can also set your own limits so usually when a player goes down the SE route - it's a serious reason.

This seriousness of SE will become more prevalent in the future when the UKGC will be introducing a central database blocking you from all licensed casinos if you SE from one. A welcome introduction but it may see a few players who use SE for other reasons being blocked from playing all together.

Regards
Mark

 

[dunover]

Hi Guys,

Just a quick follow-up based on the recent comments.

Apologies for assuming that the OP had a problem with gambling. It's just that's how we classify a SE internally. We have take a break and you can also set your own limits so usually when a player goes down the SE route - it's a serious reason.

This seriousness of SE will become more prevalent in the future when the UKGC will be introducing a central database blocking you from all licensed casinos if you SE from one. A welcome introduction but it may see a few players who use SE for other reasons being blocked from playing all together.Regards
Mark

Therefore given what you've just said above it is ABSOLUTELY VITAL that ALL UKGC sites have a clear and easy-to-distinguish option of breaks and SE to avoid problems for both players and casinos. Given the large proportion of revenues, like it not, that come from problem gamblers then this could seriously affect the UKGC-licensed sites' revenues if not administered correctly.

 

[Deeplay]

Hi Guys,

This seriousness of SE will become more prevalent in the future when the UKGC will be introducing a central database blocking you from all licensed casinos if you SE from one. A welcome introduction but it may see a few players who use SE for other reasons being blocked from playing all together.

Regards
Mark

If true which I do not doubt your source I feel this will be a really positive step forward insomuch as Protecting problem gamblers. Sure fall out can come in the initial stages for those suddenly finding themselves not able to play. But overall I feel so long as it is clear if you SE from 1 site under the UKGC license you will be blocked from all sites. This for me would see me choosing "cool off" periods or deposit limits. Both of the latter I do use as and when I want to. I rare SE now as I see the implications. And see this is for those who really need to steer clear of just 1 bet. More reason that ever for the legit casinos to really get there in house RS settings readily available without the need to contact CS.

A bold and quite radical move by the UKGC which I think can help many who really do struggle with online gaming. In the end though its down the person as if a person really wants to gamble they will even if it means getting the fix at a clip joint registered at godknowswhere . com

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

A positive introduction indeed. As you say though it needs to be transparent what is happening.

Could this potentially drive problem gamblers to black market (non UKGC licensed) sites though?

Mark

 

[Deeplay]

A positive introduction indeed. As you say though it needs to be transparent what is happening.

Could this potentially drive problem gamblers to black market (non UKGC licensed) sites though?

Mark

I think its a clear yes that it will. But thats why such things such as SE should always be seen as just part of the solution to a much bigger personal problem. In the end its down to the person to really work at quitting. I know guys who have had gamblock installed vowing never to bet again but found a way. And same with this ruling it will alas mean some will go the darker areas of online gaming no doubt.

But overall I think it shows that if they do implement this that the UKGC is taking this issue seriously which many gambling addiction resources have felt up until now that they have not. Its like the shop wide SE from the high street bookies. You can still find a place to bet if you really want to. But overall it would be a good tool. Maybe giving some time to pause which can make all the difference. But yeah I rekon some will find that being SE from all legit Uk casinos will end up playing at places they normally never would have.

 

[interlog]

A positive introduction indeed. As you say though it needs to be transparent what is happening.

Could this potentially drive problem gamblers to black market (non UKGC licensed) sites though?

Mark

It potentially could. But to put it bluntly - that is not of your concern. You, as casino that abides by the rules, have done your bit. It takes two to tango and the player that self excludes should also share the responsibility of the gambling problem.

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

It potentially could. But to put it bluntly - that is not of your concern

A bit harsh I think, we have a concern about any player that has a problem. My comment was more to prompt a discussion on how the licensed operators and the UKGC can prevent this, rather than any other reason.

 

[Deeplay]

A bit harsh I think, we have a concern about any player that has a problem. My comment was more to prompt a discussion on how the licensed operators and the UKGC can prevent this, rather than any other reason.

Would be interesting for sure to see other peoples pov on how and what can be done by the UKGC and casinos in relation to these on going issues which lets face it are not going to go away.

 

[interlog]

A bit harsh I think, we have a concern about any player that has a problem. My comment was more to prompt a discussion on how the licensed operators and the UKGC can prevent this, rather than any other reason.

Not harsh at all. There is only so much that you can do. If a player with a gambling problem that he is unable to control wants to keep on gambling, then he will do that.

I appreciate that you as a casino want to do all that you can. And by not letting a player in that is self excluded, you have done your bit. You can't control the whole of the internet, and neither can other licensed operators and the UKGC to answer your question.

 

[bjtaz44]

Didn't self exclude, but asked for an additional deposit bonus after deposits all week, yet again... support said no go so I too have finally had enough with 32red also. They gave me the 72hr thing also so obviously different method than actually closing for a gambling problem. But regardless if just closing account it's72hrs I guess? 32 red was my favourite casino though but they going down for me so have to get it out of my deposit habits some how lol.

 

[psychogene]

Yeah I agree with the OP - self exclusion should be automated and absolutely streamlined to be done as easily as possible and without having to manually ask anyone to do it for you. I have self-excluded myself for 3 months at various casino's (including 32red) in the past and I certainly appreciate the casinos that allow you to log into your account, select the self-exclusion period hit OK and then your logged out and locked out for the duration.

'Self-exclusion facility' is really just e-mail 32red and tell them you want self exclusion. You have go through 3 seperate links just to get that information from their homepage. At places like videoslots you login goto my profile->responsible gaming set your self-exclusion period and BAM! your done - logged out and locked out. No need to e-mail or talk to support or whatever you should just be able to self-exclude yourself without anyone knowing and that should be that.

Also self-exclusion doesn't mean that person has lost control of his gambling as a whole it could mean he just wants to stop playing at that particular place for whatever reason - i.e losing to much there but maybe winning alot elsewhere, treated poorly or not enough freebies, issues with deposit/withdrawals etc. - to me should not matter what the reason is - a player wants to self-exclude he should not need to explain himself.

 

[Jasminebed]

I read earlier that a central data base for self-exclusion would have to be opted into by a player.

There may be valid reasons why a player would want to self-exclude from a particular casino, but not necessarily all of them.

 

[Tirilej]

I belive that what we all need to understand now is that all of the casinos see Self Exclusion as someone who can't control their gambling.
They therefor let them SE for a shorter time or forever (some casinos don't have the forever option though).

The rest is called closing your account. That is for a specific time or an undefined. For doing that you can have any reson and don't have to tell why.

I'm not saying that is how I want it to be but that is how different casinos see it, and it is also what most rules say.

SE = Problem gambler (It should be closed immediately)
Closing = I don't want to play for any reason (No hurry since you don't want to play there anyway)

 

[Jono777]

I personally prefer self control over self exclusion, however I also appreciate that this is not 'suitable for all' SE as we have all seen can grow out of control into a mountain of problems, where the player may have just wanted a short break etc.

Betway was my 'nightmare' casino so I just stopped depositing there and haven't looked back, I've also suggested to 'disgruntled' rather than 'problem' players never to close an account for lots of reasons.

Current SE measures in general across the board are not working and IMO the whole charade needs readdressing.

I read another related article earlier today based on FOBT's and that only a massive 0.04% of users had actually used the 'set limits' options when playing.