Self Exclusion - Major flaws

[brizman]

It's obviously an indication that you attempted 3 times to open an account with the group, then succeeded in the end, fully knowing you had self excluded.

In any event you had won and gotten winnings confiscated I'm sure you would have a completely different argument.

How would you know winnings would have been confiscated? There is no responsible gaming issue here according to casino group

 

[brizman]

Maybe 32red rep can clarify?

 

[brizman]

Ok..here's my point..unibet account was closed in 2013..permanently..during the years i had tried to reopen but they refused. I self excluded with 32red in feb 2018, at that point i didnt know they were kindred group. In December 2018 kindred introduced cross platform exclusions...but alramingly, didnt apply this to players that were excluded at that time. So..December 2019..i opened bingo.com account, that was platinum gaming (part of kindred) i didnt know this until recently..at no point did i try to recover 32red losses as being part of unibet..however, it's clear there are major failings in allowing bingo.com account to be opened.

 

[brizman]

I am not seeking sympathy or support.i have been gambling for years and know how casinos work. This however is a fail in my eyes. Whether people choose to believe i am genuine or not is up to them really

 

[EkJR]

Truly baffling is that you apparently are not taking any serious steps to get your gambling addiction under control. All your posts are bashing a casino/group trying to drum up support for your case but at no point have you shown any steps you have taken. Instead, you are opening more accounts and then blame it all on the casinos/operators and shout from the top of your lungs to have deposits returned.

How about taking some responsibility yourself, you know, you are a grown-up after all?

Sorry but I have no more sympathy for people like you. Each casino is offering deposit/loss/wagering limits which you could set-up the soon you register. That would be a sign that you are taking steps to control your habit/addiction.

Now you want everyone to be on your side in getting your deposits back. Sorry, I won't buy it. A simple click on the licence seal would have shown you that bingo.com is in the same group as Unibet/32REd. You didn't do that simple due diligence, knowing that you have self-excluded at other places in the past. Any normal player would check just to make sure he/she can play without having winnings voided.

No it wouldnt as they aren't on the same licence is the only thing I would have said about the above.

 

[Slottery]

Would that make things clearer and reduce the number of these misunderstandings and flaws if all the self-exclusions (where possible, at least UK, Sweden and maybe more follow when countries get themselves regulated) would be countrywide through Gamstop, Spelpaus etc..? All sites would re-direct self-exclusion requests directly to them.

Not sure what would happen but at least then it would be only black and white with no these hassles where the player is self-excluded somewhere, have closed account somewhere and play in third place.

 

[brizman]

Perhaps 32red affiliate can clear up what the process is?

 

[slot_zombie]

Probably best to stop hammering on Casino groups' doors now fella, and get some help.

 

[brizman]

Probably best to stop hammering on Casino groups' doors now fella, and get some help.

Sure..some clarity however?

 

[Borgie]

Perhaps 32red affiliate can clear up what the process is?

How many more times are you going to ask in one morning. I am sure Mark will respond but people here have already explained what's what to you whether you or they think its fair or not.

Is it that you think if you keep yelling and repeating yourself someone will give you your money back? . Being a casino with people like you becomes a nightmare as you want your cake and eat it. If everyone did that there would be no more casinos.

I'm not saying casinos are perfect . Far from it but those who do what you do are a nightmare. How about ensuring you don't do what you did again and sharing that story with us as that would be helpful .

 

[brizman]

How many more times are you going to ask in one morning. I am sure Mark will respond but people here have already explained what's what to you whether you or they think its fair or not.

Is it that you think if you keep yelling and repeating yourself someone will give you your money back? . Being a casino with people like you becomes a nightmare as you want your cake and eat it. If everyone did that there would be no more casinos.

I'm not saying casinos are perfect . Far from it but those who do what you do are a nightmare. How about ensuring you don't do what you did again and sharing that story with us as that would be helpful .

So casinos are allowed there cake and eat it? Why should it only be one way? Its clear there are a LOT of casino pluggers on here. Wow. Keep plugging..

 

[Borgie]

So casinos are allowed there cake and eat it? Why should it only be one way? Its clear there are a LOT of casino pluggers on here. Wow. Keep plugging..

Not at all. Many of us will often take the players side. Just because you aren't getting the support you want. Each case and each problem is different . However if you think we are all pro casino all the time what are you hoping to achieve.

 

[EkJR]

Would that make things clearer and reduce the number of these misunderstandings and flaws if all the self-exclusions (where possible, at least UK, Sweden and maybe more follow when countries get themselves regulated) would be countrywide through Gamstop, Spelpaus etc..? All sites would re-direct self-exclusion requests directly to them.

Not sure what would happen but at least then it would be only black and white with no these hassles where the player is self-excluded somewhere, have closed account somewhere and play in third place.

Gamstop is for all operators though. If you wanted to exclude from only one casino then that wouldnt work.

 

[brizman]

I am merely highlighting the flaw. That was pointed out at start of thread. Had i won, casino wouldn't have paid..but because i lost..well that's ok. Isn't this a forum to highlight such issues?

 

[EkJR]

So casinos are allowed there cake and eat it? Why should it only be one way? Its clear there are a LOT of casino pluggers on here. Wow. Keep plugging..

I'm far from a plugger for any casino but just stating that the licences dictate SE, not the groups unless they chose to do so.

 

[Borgie]

I am merely highlighting the flaw. That was pointed out at start of thread. Had i won, casino wouldn't have paid..but because i lost..well that's ok. Isn't this a forum to highlight such issues?

Yea i think you have highlighted it.... lots...

 

[brizman]

I'm far from a plugger for any casino but just stating that the licences dictate SE, not the groups unless they chose to do so.

Which..in this case the group has after December 2018 apparently..but not for the existing excluded players for some reason?

 

[brizman]

Yea i think you gave highlighted it.... lots...

Can i ask your opinion on this case then?

 

[Slottery]

Gamstop is for all operators though. If you wanted to exclude from only one casino then that wouldnt work.

That's what i thought, to bring all self-exclusions nationwide. Only to be used for gambling problems and would be 100% clear. Normal closures would be on casino level but if you have gambling problem, then it would apply nationwide instead like it's now that you are problem gambler somewhere and VIP in other place.

If whole self-exclusion database would be controlled by one authority, then everything at least would be consistent and clear. For RG point of view it doesn't make much sense that you have problem somewhere but not in other place with same games.

 

[Borgie]

Can i ask your opinion on this case then?

I think the situation is far from ideal but it seems steps have been taken to improve procedures. I have no idea what you have done to stop yourself falling foul of this type of thing again as you havent shared that only blamed the casino.

I await the reps comments if any to summarise.

 

[Harry_BKK]

No it wouldnt as they aren't on the same licence is the only thing I would have said about the above.

Oh please, the OP looks like a very clued up gambler. If not from the licence seal than a 5-second Google search would have cleared it up.

Geez, we are not talking here about newbies. If he closed his account in 2013, he is not new to this.

I would venture to say that in the absolute majority of these SE cases people know exactly what they are doing and even do it on purpose to get a free ride.

IMO, the UKGC should put a stop to the refund policy and instead ask the casino operators to donate funds/winnings to a charity. The number of cases would drop instantly by 99.9%.

 

[brizman]

Oh please, the OP looks like a very clued up gambler. If not from the licence seal than a 5-second Google search would have cleared it up.

Geez, we are not talking here about newbies. If he closed his account in 2013, he is not new to this.

I would venture to say that in the absolute majority of these SE cases people know exactly what they are doing and even do it on purpose to get a free ride.

IMO, the UKGC should put a stop to the refund policy and instead ask the casino operators to donate funds/winnings to a charity. The number of cases would drop instantly by 99.9%.

Can you please climb down off your high horse please? Ask yourself this..if kindred introduced a cross platform exclusion in December 2018, what possible single reason could they have not to include current excluded players in that?

 

[EkJR]

Oh please, the OP looks like a very clued up gambler. If not from the licence seal than a 5-second Google search would have cleared it up.

Geez, we are not talking here about newbies. If he closed his account in 2013, he is not new to this.

I would venture to say that in the absolute majority of these SE cases people know exactly what they are doing and even do it on purpose to get a free ride.

IMO, the UKGC should put a stop to the refund policy and instead ask the casino operators to donate funds/winnings to a charity. The number of cases would drop instantly by 99.9%.

I think there are two different scenarios.

Player plays at a casino, wins a lot and goes to withdraw. The casino suddenly finds an SE from another site in their group(not on same licence) and revoked the winnings. Do you think that's fair when the rules state SE is licence based?

Second aspect is the player trying to get round a casino and losing money and claiming they were SE'd. In that circumstance there is fault on the player and the casino. The main point is they should have been caught on registration/verification with the new post and shouldn't have been able to gamble. If a casino is doing the appropriate checks then SE issues wont happen. They do seem to be going down a lot. I agree on giving deposits to charity if there is deliberate circumventing but at the same time the verification policies in place for said casino would have to come under some scrutiny.

 

[slot_zombie]

The casino freerolling industry.. The gift that just keeps on giving to this forum, week after week ..

 

[Harry_BKK]

I think there are two different scenarios.

Player plays at a casino, wins a lot and goes to withdraw. The casino suddenly finds an SE from another site in their group(not on same licence) and revoked the winnings. Do you think that's fair when the rules state SE is licence based?

Second aspect is the player trying to get round a casino and losing money and claiming they were SE'd. In that circumstance there is fault on the player and the casino. The main point is they should have been caught on registration/verification with the new post and shouldn't have been able to gamble. If a casino is doing the appropriate checks then SE issues wont happen. They do seem to be going down a lot. I agree on giving deposits to charity if there is deliberate circumventing but at the same time the verification policies in place for said casino would have to come under some scrutiny.

I will wait for Mark to comment because I think as usual we have not heard the entire story.

Players who try circumventing a SE usually make small changes to their registration details to avoid being flagged at registration. There are entire threads and guides in specific forums to teach players what is possible at which casino.

EkJR, I know and appreciate you being an advocate for players but we are not talking about completely innocent and unknowing newbies in most cases. I am all for coming down hard on casinos, much harder than it is now the case but players have to finally start accepting responsibility too.

As it is now a SE-ed player can just simply jump around and open new accounts. If s/he gets it done and loses his/her money they ask for the money back. There are no steps/procedures for SE'ed players, they can just carry on. IMO, that is a very one-sided affair putting the onus on casinos only while the player is playing a "catch me if you can" game.