Self Exclusion - Major flaws

[colinsunderland]

Why? They ruled against me.

Because an ADR wouldn't usually rule on a self exclusion issue

No one is ganging up on you.

 

[goatwack]

One of those scenarios where the rep interjecting with the Facts Hammer might save us all from this tedium

 

[brizman]

Everything i have stated is true

 

[brizman]

Ecogra ruled in favour of casino

 

[brizman]

One of those scenarios where the rep interjecting with the Facts Hammer might save us all from this tedium

I would welcome that too..

 

[colinsunderland]

No to the screenshot then?

 

[brizman]

No to the screenshot then?

Yes..i am on mobile. I will provide it, i have nothing to hide.

 

[brizman]

I have screenshot there outcome.

 

[brizman]

Ecogra ruling self exclude..to all the doubters and witch hunters...

 

[brizman]

I have asked kindred and ecogra to provide evidence of platform exclusion in December 2018..i've also asked kindred as to why players pre December '18 that were excluded were not incorporated into there great new rg policy..no answers as yet from either

 

[brizman]

Silence is deafening now.....

 

[goatwack]

- Intermission -

 

[brizman]

I wondered that too, but as the OP doesn't seem to like any question that doesn't back his story up, I decided I couldn't be bothered to ask

Ouch....

 

[brizman]

How did the ADR adjudicate on an SE issue I wonder...

Double ouch...

 

[brizman]

 

[goatwack]

A particularly droll way to bump a thread, I must confess

Here's another two

 

[EkJR]

I have asked kindred and ecogra to provide evidence of platform exclusion in December 2018..i've also asked kindred as to why players pre December '18 that were excluded were not incorporated into there great new rg policy..no answers as yet from either

I have screenshot there outcome.View attachment 121788

As I said before, this was a business decision by the operator just like it will have been a decision made somewhere to only apply it for accounts excluded from that date onwards. eCogra could rule in that circumstance as it wasnt a legislative requirement for Kindred to have cross group exclusions in place. UKGC rules state that SE is licence specific. By all means raise it with them but I doubt they will do anything about it as it's not a regulatory breach.

 

[brizman]

As I said before, this was a business decision by the operator just like it will have been a decision made somewhere to only apply it for accounts excluded from that date onwards. eCogra could rule in that circumstance as it wasnt a legislative requirement for Kindred to have cross group exclusions in place. UKGC rules state that SE is licence specific. By all means raise it with them but I doubt they will do anything about it as it's not a regulatory breach.

I disagree..kindred bought over 32red in 2017...which means they had access for 2 years of all self exclude customers, when implementing there great new rg policy, i find it criminal that it is not applied to the database that they already hold.

 

[EkJR]

I disagree..kindred bought over 32red in 2017...which means they had access for 2 years of all self exclude customers, when implementing there great new rg policy, i find it criminal that it is not applied to the database that they already hold.

That is for the 32 Red Rep to clarify on why they havent merged the old database or otherwise. Just telling you how eCogra could rule on it as it's not regulatory. Normally the UKGC deal with SE issues but only if it's one a singular licence. You also have leave to appeal the ruling by eCogra.

 

[colinsunderland]

Ecogra ruling self exclude..to all the doubters and witch hunters...

No actually they specifically state that any irresponsibility towards a player must be investigated by the UKGC. They ruled on if any T&C's were broken, and concluded they weren't.

FWIW, I am fairly sure this was discussed on here around the time, if you search Mark's post around the end of 2018 - start of 2019 you may get some clarity into this.

As for your sarcastic comments about silence, I didn't ignore questions while answering part of your posts like you have from the start. I did however make my tea, eat it, then go in the shower, so I'm sorry I didn't respond to you within 5 seconds of your post, but I do actually have other things to do.

As for your other ridiculous claims, I hold no accounts within the Kindred Group, nor do I promote them. I closed my 32red account due to their attitude towards responsible gaming, something they later got a large penalty for. I won't ever open my account back up with them for that reason, so you claiming everyone is on their side is totally misguided. They also stole from affiliates so even with my promotional affiliate hat on, I wouldn't blindly back them up. I have had many an argument with Mark, especially about RG issues, but I still think he is in the top 3 reps on here, and the fact he hasn't replied actually says more to me than if he had. He won't be able to comment on specific cases, and no matter what he says, you won't believe him, so I can understand why he hasn't responded yet.

I think you were playing the system to try to get your money back after you lost. I am sure if you won you would have been arguing they should pay you as the cross license exclusions didn't apply until after your SE date.

Bet you wish I had stayed silent now.

 

[EkJR]

Have to agree. Had Kindred group reported to the UKGC on at least 2 occasions before now personally, had arguments with the rep as well so we aren't on their side at all. Simply stating the facts that UKGC cannot do anything to help here as its not a regulatory breach by the operator. Also, as Colin has stated above they havent breached their terms. Yes, it might be really crap and almost unethical to a point, but by the letter of the law(and their own terms) they havent done much wrong!

 

[goatwack]

Silence.....

 

[goatwack]

Flipping hell so I got the popcorn out for nothing

 

[brizman]

No actually they specifically state that any irresponsibility towards a player must be investigated by the UKGC. They ruled on if any T&C's were broken, and concluded they weren't.

FWIW, I am fairly sure this was discussed on here around the time, if you search Mark's post around the end of 2018 - start of 2019 you may get some clarity into this.

As for your sarcastic comments about silence, I didn't ignore questions while answering part of your posts like you have from the start. I did however make my tea, eat it, then go in the shower, so I'm sorry I didn't respond to you within 5 seconds of your post, but I do actually have other things to do.

As for your other ridiculous claims, I hold no accounts within the Kindred Group, nor do I promote them. I closed my 32red account due to their attitude towards responsible gaming, something they later got a large penalty for. I won't ever open my account back up with them for that reason, so you claiming everyone is on their side is totally misguided. They also stole from affiliates so even with my promotional affiliate hat on, I wouldn't blindly back them up. I have had many an argument with Mark, especially about RG issues, but I still think he is in the top 3 reps on here, and the fact he hasn't replied actually says more to me than if he had. He won't be able to comment on specific cases, and no matter what he says, you won't believe him, so I can understand why he hasn't responded yet.

I think you were playing the system to try to get your money back after you lost. I am sure if you won you would have been arguing they should pay you as the cross license exclusions didn't apply until after your SE date.

Bet you wish I had stayed silent now.

Not at all..i am glad i spoke up. Like you say...would i have argued had i won? Most likely yes, because the start of the thread shows...they were never going to pay no matter what, so i could never have won.
You're right in one thing though, the fact mark hasn't replied speaks volumes to me also.

 

[brizman]

Lets just see what SAR reveals..there's legs in this yet...