Self Exclusion: 32Red vs. RedBet

[Harry_BKK]

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.

The whole charade is actually just useless, period!!! It is in place to assure everybody that someone is doing a responsible thing, giving people a false sense of security.

Whereas the problem starts much, much earlier. By the time somebody thinks or talks about SE he/she mostly has already lost pretty much all they had themselves / had borrowed from banks/CC's / swindled from friends&relatives etc. Now with empty pockets, perfect, let's SE the player and he/she'll be safe and taken care of by some NGO's offering counseling. What a wonderful world.

Hence, nothing is done to even prevent a player getting into this situation. Every casino accepts deposit after deposit without even once a pop-up chat appearing to ask the player whether he/she is OK or if he/she would like to take a break from chasing his/her losses.

At the end of the day we are talking about a similar addiction like alcohol, drugs etc. If a player wants to find a way to gamble, he will find one, no matter what. Registering under different names, opening multiple accounts, using somebody elses CC's, going to a land based joint, etc.etc..

A common SE database would be a first step. SE from on place for gambling problems and you are blocked from all casinos/betting places, land based included for the period of the SE (1 year or similar). Anything else is just a drop into the ocean as the player will find, just as the alcoholic or druggie, a way around it all.

 

[paul7388]

The whole charade is actually just useless, period!!! It is in place to assure everybody that someone is doing a responsible thing, giving people a false sense of security.

Whereas the problem starts much, much earlier. By the time somebody thinks or talks about SE he/she mostly has already lost pretty much all they had themselves / had borrowed from banks/CC's / swindled from friends&relatives etc. Now with empty pockets, perfect, let's SE the player and he'll be safe and taken care of by some NGO's offering counseling. What a wonderful world.

Hence, nothing is done to even prevent a player getting into this situation. Every casino accepts deposit after deposit without even once a pop-up chat appearing to ask the player whether he/she is OK or if he/she would like to take a break from chasing his/her losses.

At the end of the day we are talking about a similar addiction as alcohol, drugs etc. If a player wants to find a way to gamble, he will find one, no matter what. Registering under different names, opening multiple accounts, using somebody elses CC's, going to a land based joint, etc.etc..

A common SE database would be a first step. SE from on place for gambling problems and you are blocked from all casinos/betting places, land based included for the period of the SE (1 year or similar). Anything else is just a drop into the ocean as the player will find, just as the alcoholic or druggie, a way around it all.

That is all very well but its impossible to block players from gambling.

The responsibility is on the player not to gamble and get all the help he can. There is no way physically possible to block a player from all gambling places.

Maybe rest of world its easier but in the UK its impossible to stop a player from entering betting establishments. In nearly every busy street in uk there are bookies everywhere, amusement arcades , casinos , every local shop selling scratchcards.

There is just no way a player can exclude himself from gambling and have nowhere left to go. All the gambling establishments can do is try to help but its all down to the player. Until he decides himself he will never gamble again and sticks to it he will continue losing all his money.

 

[Tirilej]

A common SE database would be a first step. SE from on place for gambling problems and you are blocked from all casinos/betting places, land based included for the period of the SE (1 year or similar). Anything else is just a drop into the ocean as the player will find, just as the alcoholic or druggie, a way around it all.

That would be a dream.
Unfortunately just like the question Mark asked before, then where would they turn to play instead?

All serious and good casinos would include themself in that. Not the rest.
So is it better if a problem gambler still play in a safe place rather than in some rogue? We don't want them to get fed either and they would be that.

I just wished all good casinos had the same rules for Self Exclusion and closing accounts, and that those idiots who write certain casinos rules explained what is what in an easy way for everyone to understand....and that they translated it correct

 

[Harry_BKK]

That is all very well but its impossible to block players from gambling.

The responsibility is on the player not to gamble and get all the help he can. There is no way physically possible to block a player from all gambling places.

Maybe rest of world its easier but in the UK its impossible to stop a player from entering betting establishments. In nearly every busy street in uk there are bookies everywhere, amusement arcades , casinos , every local shop selling scratchcards.

There is just no way a player can exclude himself from gambling and have nowhere left to go. All the gambling establishments can do is try to help but its all down to the player. Until he decides himself he will never gamble again and sticks to it he will continue losing all his money.

Of course you could. Make it mandatory that a punter brings his ID to the betting shop and run a check before he is allowed to place his/her bets or sit down on a slot machine.

Singapore does that, works absolutely fine. Yes, the queue is a nuisance but you can't even get in without showing your passport or driving license.

But on the other hand you are right, some responsibility is with the player himself. If he/she can't admit that he/she has a problem then nobody can help.

However, i just laugh though at the casinos promoting their responsible gaming policies yet accepting 15, 20 or more deposits in the matter of hours from a player without blinking with an eye.

 

[paul7388]

Of course you could. Make it mandatory that a punter brings his ID to the betting shop and run a check before he is allowed to place his/her bets or sit down on a slot machine.

Singapore does that, works absolutely fine. Yes, the queue is a nuisance but you can't even get in without showing your passport or driving license.

But on the other hand you are right, some responsibility is with the player himself. If he/she can't admit that he/she has a problem then nobody can help.

However, i just laugh though at the casinos promoting their responsible gaming policies yet accepting 15, 20 or more deposits in the matter of hours from a player without blinking with an eye.

That sounds good in theory but like I said it would never work in UK.

There are too many bookies and amusement arcades everywhere. All your local shops sell scratchcards etc.

There is just no way possible you could have all these places checking ID of everyone entering. Take the bookies for instance on a Saturday. the places are mobbed and if people could not place bets on horse races on time there would be chaos. Theres no way the staff could ask every customer for id then check if they were self excluded.

And people walk into amusement arcades which are everywhere and don't have to even approach anyone and all the pubs have machines as well. Would the barstaff have to leave the bar and go and id everyone that puts money in the slots and check they haven't got a gambling problem. And sorry but all the shopkeepers can hardly say no you cant get £5 of scratchcards till we see your id and check to see if you have a gambling problem.

Maybe the rest of the world its easier but literally in UK there are so many different types of places that have forms of gambling there is no way you could ever put into practice a way of stopping addicts from gambling if they wish.

Maybe its just a british culture but all types of gamblings legal and theres so many ways to do it. Take the centre of Glasgow for instance. There must be 30+ bookies, 100 pubs and clubs, 3 casinos , hundreds of shops, 10+ amusement arcades all in the space of 15minutes walk. just no way possible to stop someone entering all these places if they wish.

 

[Harry_BKK]

That sounds good in theory but like I said it would never work in UK.

There are too many bookies and amusement arcades everywhere. All your local shops sell scratchcards etc.

There is just no way possible you could have all these places checking ID of everyone entering. Take the bookies for instance on a Saturday. the places are mobbed and if people could not place bets on horse races on time there would be chaos. Theres no way the staff could ask every customer for id then check if they were self excluded.

And people walk into amusement arcades which are everywhere and don't have to even approach anyone and all the pubs have machines as well. Would the barstaff have to leave the bar and go and id everyone that puts money in the slots and check they haven't got a gambling problem. And sorry but all the shopkeepers can hardly say no you cant get £5 of scratchcards till we see your id and check to see if you have a gambling problem.

Maybe the rest of the world its easier but literally in UK there are so many different types of places that have forms of gambling there is no way you could ever put into practice a way of stopping addicts from gambling if they wish.

Maybe its just a british culture but all types of gamblings legal and theres so many ways to do it. Take the centre of Glasgow for instance. There must be 30+ bookies, 100 pubs and clubs, 3 casinos , hundreds of shops, 10+ amusement arcades all in the space of 15minutes walk. just no way possible to stop someone entering all these places if they wish.

Understand Paul.

It works fine in Singapore. They have literally 10's of thousands of visitors to each of their 2 big casinos, millions every month. Any time of the day is a queue to get in, they employ part-time pensioners who scan the ID (any modern ID card, passport or driving license can be scanned in a split of a second) and only after they have the green light they let the customer in. Any problems, the security guys take over. Works fine and dandy.

Also, a spouse can exclude their husband/wife and he/she won't be let in for the duration of the exclusion.

Additionally, all Singaporeans have to pay 100SGD (appr. 50GBP) for a 24hr pass, hence it holds some people back to even go in.

So there are different ways to curb it at least, but what is done at the moment by land based and online joints as well as the Gaming Commissions is a bit of a laugh, IMO. Certainly, not to keep players out who should not be gambling. They would cut their revenue if they have a too harsh stance on gambling problems.

EDIT: Going to bed now, 1.40am here in Bangkok. Happy gaming to all

 

[interlog]

However, i just laugh though at the casinos promoting their responsible gaming policies yet accepting 15, 20 or more deposits in the matter of hours from a player without blinking with an eye.

I would be royally peed off if I am being questioned by a casino if I were to make 15 or so deposits in a matter of hours.

At the end of the day, there is only so much that a casino can do to help problem gamblers. Those problems gamblers first of all need to be prepared to be helped, else nothing will stop them wasting their money.

I did some research on PC blocking software and Outdated URL (Invalid) is very good. I even had to get their assistance to undo it from my PC when I accidentally activated it for 7 days instead of 2 days. It works and blocked every casino on the net that I could find and I couldn't even get to this website (incidentally, I don't have a connection to the Company providing this software). You can't get rid of the thing, even by tinkering with the registry.

There are tools available for problem gamblers but I have yet to see the majority of casinos mention or link to these tools, other than linking to organisations that may be able to help.

 

[pmhcfc]

I suppose the cynics amongst us would think 32 Red are trying to delay someone / making it difficult from SE ing in order to keep their business. Most other (decent) casinos have easy access to SE, some even given the option to SE for 5 years and it can be done within seconds.

The same can be said for 32 Red re not allowing withdrawals to be 'flushed' and having a rule which states that ALL withrdrawals will remain reversable for a minimum of 24 hours. The ONLY reason for this is them hoping the customer will be lulled into tempatation and reverse said withdrawal. This really, REALLY annoys me. Why can't a casino just let you have you winnings, it's so unfair to leave people the option to do this. It's a horrible business practice and one I'm sure they didn't have when they were winning awards.

As I read this thread, I too thought it totally unacceptable for the 32 Red rep to assume the OP had a problem with gambling, stating how sorry he was for the OP! How rude!

As other people have suggested, there appears to be little cracks that are starting to appear in the once 'mighty' and 'untouchable' 32 Red Casino...Industry leaders no more and perhaps a case of becoming too big and losing that personal touch. It's become all about money to the owners and shareholders and the more they can get (i.e by not flushing withdrawals) the happier they are, even at the expense of their 'customers'.

 

[dunover]

I suppose the cynics amongst us would think 32 Red are trying to delay someone / making it difficult from SE ing in order to keep their business. Most other (decent) casinos have easy access to SE, some even given the option to SE for 5 years and it can be done within seconds.

The same can be said for 32 Red re not allowing withdrawals to be 'flushed' and having a rule which states that ALL withrdrawals will remain reversable for a minimum of 24 hours. The ONLY reason for this is them hoping the customer will be lulled into tempatation and reverse said withdrawal. This really, REALLY annoys me. Why can't a casino just let you have you winnings, it's so unfair to leave people the option to do this. It's a horrible business practice and one I'm sure they didn't have when they were winning awards.

As I read this thread, I too thought it totally unacceptable for the 32 Red rep to assume the OP had a problem with gambling, stating how sorry he was for the OP! How rude!

As other people have suggested, there appears to be little cracks that are starting to appear in the once 'mighty' and 'untouchable' 32 Red Casino...Industry leaders no more and perhaps a case of becoming too big and losing that personal touch. It's become all about money to the owners and shareholders and the more they can get (i.e by not flushing withdrawals) the happier they are, even at the expense of their 'customers'.

I agree with your sentiments but many forget that 32red and other MG's that use the Viper platform simply don't have or cannot easily add the self-administered break/SE menus that you find on modern bespoke casinos like say Guts or Bet-at etc. They are limited by their software. I agree RG section/deposit limits part is also tedious to find and use. Viper clients are basically hopelessly out-of-date and are almost anachronistic by their very existence.

The pending period is another subject though.

 

[chuchu59]

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

@Mark- What's this? Balthazar never said in his post he had difficulties in controlling his gambling in his opening post so you shouldnt have revealed it out of privacy concerns.

The self-exclusion process at 32RED is a bit cumbersome and in my opinion once a request is made(not necessarily using the form) the account should be closed immediately though it could be on a temporary basis like 7 days. The casino needs to give notice to the player that they need to fill in a form failing which the closure of the account will cease after those 7 days. Immediate closure, albeit a temporary one will ensure the player cannot have access to his account which helps especially if problem gambling is the issue.

 

[mac72]

I can't comment on Self Exclusion as i've never used it at 32 or anywhere else.However the 'Take-A-Break' at 32red i have used (since they brought in the 24hr pending period) and never had any issues with it.
All i've ever had to do is go onto their live chat and request it (you can have any period from 24hrs break to 6mths) and its always been actioned within 10mins.They simply lock your account and when the timeframe is over you can get it opened straight away.
I found it particularly useful should you have a big win on friday afternoon, saturday morning knowing that the temptation to reverse will be there all weekend.Once its locked its just the same as having your withdrawal flushed (even better imo as flushing in my experience only means your funds will be paid in the next 'payrun' and can still be reversed) and the one thing you can't knock 32red on is that your payment (as long as you haven't breached any t+c's which would be hard at 32 as theirs are the most transparent in the industry) is guaranteed.
If there really is an issue with a delay in self exclusion and thats really what you want to do my advice, just action the take a break for a month and then you'll have plenty of time to self exclude (or cool off).
Its a bit tough on 32 to say they're trying to keep you from self excluding when there are tools available to you which will achieve the same aim,you just have to use them.

 

[Deeplay]

A good example of how things should be done. A while back I emailed BGO asking for my account to be closed it had been closed a while and had just re-opened. The CS emailed me and asked to me clarify a few points (I had not made it clear for my reasons of closure) but he did say that in the meantime he had suspended my account so it was locked and I was unable to access. Which when I tested it was true. So not matter what my reasons were they did the right thing and blocked me regardless while they sought clarification from me. Not as perfect as those casinos that have instant 1 or 2 click RG functions but for those that don't it should be standard practice to close of the account and then ask questions, and not the other way around. Anything less is not a RG policy that works!

 

[mac72]

A good example of how things should be done. A while back I emailed BGO asking for my account to be closed it had been closed a while and had just re-opened. The CS emailed me and asked to me clarify a few points (I had not made it clear for my reasons of closure) but he did say that in the meantime he had suspended my account so it was locked and I was unable to access. Which when I tested it was true. So not matter what my reasons were they did the right thing and blocked me regardless while they sought clarification from me. Not as perfect as those casinos that have instant 1 or 2 click RG functions but for those that don't it should be standard practice to close of the account and then ask questions, and not the other way around. Anything less is not a RG policy that works!

It's fine but dosen't achieve a lot. 5 Minutes later had you decided you wished to play i'm pretty sure they would have immediately reopened as no timeframe had been set so you still had complete control over whether you played or not and if you can deal with that no need to 'close' in the first place.That won't happen under SE or Take a Break

 

[Deeplay]

It's fine but dosen't achieve a lot. 5 Minutes later had you decided you wished to play i'm pretty sure they would have immediately reopened as no timeframe had been set so you still had complete control over whether you played or not and if you can deal with that no need to 'close' in the first place.That won't happen under SE or Take a Break

Missing the point. I am saying that they immediately put a hold on the account until they had clarification on what my reasons were. If you notice I did not share here what my reasons were as its not important. What is important is that they did suspend the account. I agree that clearly requested SE should be dont immediately without questions asked. But also can understand why a casino would want to clarify if the reasons were not clear.

And we all know the way around this by having these functions built in so the player can be in full control. Something 32red and others lack. The size of 32red you would think they could find a work around for this regardless of the antiqued software they run off. But they dont which can only give rise to speculation as to why.

 

[mac72]

Sorry but i don't think that i'm missing the point at all.Ok they suspended the account but you could of immediately asked for the suspension to be lifted so in effect nothing has been achieved until you go through the manual process of whether you wish to self exclude or take a break.All you had at this stage with the account 'suspended' was yourself saying you didn't wish to play until you decided you wished to play again which you could do so at any time without the need for 'suspension' so whats the point in that?

 

[dunover]

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.

Actually Balt the regulations are changing in Oct 2015 - 32red and all UKGC casinos MUST have an instant automated SE/break facility, none of this e-mail and wait or hang on to live chat etc:




(From the UKGC licence conditions)

 

[dunover]

Also this which means there is a clear distinction between SE/TAB again automated from Oct 2015. Most UKGC casinos already have this bar the Viper ones.

 

[Richas]

Actually Balt the regulations are changing in Oct 2015 - 32red and all UKGC casinos MUST have an instant automated SE/break facility, none of this e-mail and wait or hang on to live chat etc:


View attachment 58166

(From the UKGC licence conditions)

Yep - This is one area the UKGC have got it about right - the requirement on all operators to allow flexible "time outs" and the requirement that self exclusion be readily available. The rule letting sites clarify with the customer which they want between the two is just common sense - it will become more important when the self exclusion also (potentially and with customer agreement) leads to self excluding from ALL UK licenced operators (2017).

 

[dunover]

Yep - This is one area the UKGC have got it about right - the requirement on all operators to allow flexible "time outs" and the requirement that self exclusion be readily available. The rule letting sites clarify with the customer which they want between the two is just common sense - it will become more important when the self exclusion also (potentially and with customer agreement) leads to self excluding from ALL UK licenced operators (2017).

Exactly. I though it was April 2016, or was that something else?

 

[Richas]

Exactly. I though it was April 2016, or was that something else?

I think the deadline for time outs, ability to opt out of some games and a requirement for deposit limits was spring this year, in practice most had done it well before the deadline.

From memory April 2016 is a deadline for retail outlets to have multi operator self exclusion schemes - casinos have launched a quick and dirty web based one already, the bookies trialling in Medway and Glasgow. There may be some other things from the recent LCCP changes with the same deadline.

This PDF likely summarises them but I'm not sure I can face a UKGC document on Sunday morning.

Old / Expired Link

31 March 2015: licence condition 2.2.1, relating to gambling software came into
force. This date is no longer marked in LCCP as the condition is currently
in force.
• 31 October 2015:
All the amendments to remote technical standards - that is the amendments to
RTS 8, 12 and 13 relating to Auto-play, financial limits and reality checks.
Social responsibility code provision 3.3.4, relating to remote gambling time-out
facilities.
In April 2015, we clarified that paragraph 8 of social responsibility code
provision 3.5.3, relating to automated self-exclusion facilities, will also
come into force on 31 October 2015, in line with other changes which
require amendments to remote gambling systems.
• Expected October 2015: in April 2015, we updated LCCP to reflect that the
Consumer Rights Act 2015 had been given Royal Assent. Licence
condition 7.1.1B now specifies that it will come into force on the date
relevant provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 are brought into
force.
• 6 April 2016:
Social responsibility code provision 3.5.6, relating to non-remote multi-operator
self-exclusion.
Social responsibility code provision 10.1.1, relating to the assessment of local
risk.
Ordinary code provision 10.1.2, relating to sharing local risk assessments.
• Social responsibility code provision 3.5.5, relating to national remote multioperator
self-exclusion will come into force one month after notification by the
Commission of the establishment of the scheme.