Self exclusion slip ups (Opinions?)

sparkz

Dormant account
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Location
Earth
Hey guys,


Just wondering something. Not going to name the casino but this is something that happened.

A while back, I decided to give gambling a break. At that time I was getting high amounts of spam from all sorts of casinos to my main isp email address (Its static and cant be changed either). Many had unsubscribers that didnt work (In fact it would often make the spam worse).

Not knowing how long I was going to "break" for I decided to mass email 100's of casinos a request to make sure if I had an account there to close it, if they have to put it down as a self exclusion...fine.

The plan was after the break, I would play at new casinos or if I remembered any from the email list I sent a mass closure of account notice to I could ask for the closed account to be lifted and continue to play.


This evening I was playing at a casino. I joined, couldnt recall ever playing there (perhaps a new site design). I put in my details, entered my old mobile phone number which I havent had for years (purely because recently I have had a lot of casino spam texts to my phone who require you to text a premium number to unsubscribe, and also a lot of phone calls). My new (well spam only) email address was used.

Started depositing. Lost a bit (nothing too major, but still a bit). Wondering if I could claim a free chip I asked support.... Only had around 20p left of my balance.

They told me that they detected I have self excluded (could of been linked to a group or something that I did that mass email to). Then went on to say my account will now be terminated and some manager will be in touch.

They also informed me that I had used some different info to sneak through the auto banning system. I mean what the hell? name, address, post code.... all the same as usual and what I would of used to ban myself with anyway (As per casinos terms.... 1 account per household, so surely their systems are not working if it didnt ban me after my post code and house number was submitted).


Clearly if I had won, the same procedure would of been actioned, where my account is terminated, funds made void.

Is it wrong to then think... If I had won, they would of had my money, so my deposits should be refunded back to me (at least part of the deposits) ? Yes I gambled, yes I put my money in and lost it.... However I was under the belief that if I had won, I would of got my money. As I mention, their servers should of picked up my house number and postcode and blocked the account either because I had self excluded (Bear in mind, as above, if their email was on the mass email list or a group they are linked to, then many I didnt have accounts with, but they still blocked my details) or if I had ever been noted as having an account, banned for breaching the "only 1 account per household" rule.

If they hadnt terminated my account, then as far as id be concerned, it was bad luck, 1 of many losses, but next time could be my lucky day.
 
That is a tough call. My own view would be that if you had self excluded and re registered and this wasn't spotted by the casino (as it should have been) then all wagering prior to the casino noticing your self excusion should stand (wiin or lose).

Of course as soon as the casino realised they were accepting wagers from a customer that had excluded themselves then they should lock your account and send you an e mail advising of this and repaying the current balance on the account back to your payment method.

I would not condone a casino voiding winnings for an excluded customer, nor do I beleive any losing stakes should be refunded.

The self exclusion system is not foolproof and the casinos registration process should do its very best to ensure that a customer is not excluded previously before allowing play. If you register and decide to play then any wins/losses should stand until either the player or the casino highlights the exclusion.

No reputable casino would deliberatley allow an excluded player to play,

Raj
bidbingo
 
Thanks,


at the end of it, the site are saying they admit no liability.

I would never of joined if I could recall self excluding.

From what has been said, whatever the outcome, If I had won, I would never of seen a penny. They even said (when talking now) that they cant stop me making another account when self excluding,


Bit of the same logic as going into a real casino, self excluding and then walking in through the back and being fine to gamble. Of course that wouldnt be allowed and you would be removed for trespassing.


From the overall outcome, I know it was my fault for playing, had I recalled self excluding from them though I wouldnt of bothered, but clearly they dont have a system for detecting self excluders who sign up (just let them signup again at their own risk, and if the player wins, void their winnings on the basis they shouldnt of been playing).

I can understand people trying to pull a fast 1, who would intentionally know they will try and claim their losses back if they lose, but cash in their wins.... But theres evidence to suggest I made an honest mistake (When contacting support, unaware of this, I had accepted my loss when I told them "I lost x amount, didnt have much luck today :(, would I be able to get a free chip to play a bit more?")

1 of my main other reasons why I mass emails 100 casino email I found also was to avoid anything happening like it did at another casino during my break.... Where they emailed me saying that unless I logged back into my account I would be charged an inactivity fee
 
That is a tough call. My own view would be that if you had self excluded and re registered and this wasn't spotted by the casino (as it should have been) then all wagering prior to the casino noticing your self excusion should stand (wiin or lose).
No, any wagering should be voided regardless of the outcome.
 
Not knowing how long I was going to "break" for I decided to mass email 100's of casinos a request to make sure if I had an account there to close it, if they have to put it down as a self exclusion...fine.

I think you nail it here. If you emailed that many Casinos asking for a ban then you should definitely have contacted support before playing at any Casino again to ensure this precise thing would not happen.

IMHO not the Casinos fault.....
 
Quite possibly, but at the same time, what annoys me, is with casinos many will have a "cool off" period, which is nowhere near as serious as a self exclusion. A few of the casinos I did want to close my account for a while in the past refused, saying its self exclusion or nothing.

From the recent chats and whatnot, its put more of an insight into things. "Self Excluding" is primarily for people who have a problem to admit they cant gamble in control. Both partys should possibly be doing things to control it. Weather its the problem gambler getting advice and support, and the casino making sure that person cant put a bet on. If they are fully aware the person has self excluded then surely they would be trying to keep to their promoting "responsible gambling" view of things by blacklisting their name, address, and post code.

As I put before, lets say a problem gambler self excluded from somewhere real, like an arcade, bookies or casino. They wont be allowed back in, simple as. They wont even get to put a bet on as they will be asked to leave/removed as soon as they get in.

This casino accused me of trying to trick their system by using slightly different details, when in reality, my name, address, post code were all exactly the same as I would use anywhere.... So that would put serious questions over their "system".... If it even exists at all.

Their policy seems to be, (which they have openly told me) is that if someone has self excluded, they can make a new account, the casino isnt liable, but if they win with their deposits, the winnings will be void.... To quote what was told to me:

"whilst we will take reasonable steps to prevent you opening new accounts during the period of Self Exclusion you must not attempt to re-open your account or any new accounts within the time period specified."

"in the unlikely event that an individual does manage to circumvent the system and continue to gamble, or open new accounts then WE, its manager(s) and employees will be released from any liability claim.’"

Its quite worrying, especially if someone who did have a problem was to self exclude there. Not only are they telling people that they can open other accounts whilst being self excluded but they clearly have no system in place to prevent self excluders from playing
 
I do not beleive any casino or gambling site would deliberately allow an excluded customer to gamble, but an exemption from liability is needed to protect operators from fraud. What is to stop someone excluding themselves then trying to get round the system by re registering and gambling for free, claiming back losses if unsucessful and collecting winnings if lucky.

Every operator has a duty of care to try and stop excluded customers re registering and playing again, however I stand by my statement that if an excluded player does manage to play again then wagers should stand win or lose.

Having said that if what you say is true, then your account SHOULD have been spotted and you should never have been allowed to deposit sparkz, its poor on the casinos part if they failed in this respect, but should not release you from any liability of your losses.

This is not only my own opinion, it was recently tested in the UK courts in the case of Graham Calvert v William Hill. In this case Graham had self excluded from Hills but reregistered and continued to gamble. He argued that Hills KNEW it was him placing the bets and should not have accepted them. His claim was dismissed.

Raj
bidbingo
 
if an excluded player does manage to play again then wagers should stand win or lose.

Raj
bidbingo

GrandMaster has it correct, " No, any wagering should be voided regardless of the outcome."

A problem gamblers bet when sneaking back in, or just overlooked should never stand win or lose, that's defeating the purpose of Self Exclusion.

And IMO, give me a break has nothing to do with a problem gambler but only announcing I need a break from loosing at your site and so I'm moving on to another and might be back some day.

Igaming sites should keep the two features totally separate and explain the difference.
 
Last edited:
thanks guys, yea I think that seems fair,


the only thing I can add to it really was that I mentioned already the evidence is there to suggest I wasnt 1 of the people trying to scam the system, afterall, I accepted my losses to them in chat when I said about my bad luck and asked for a free chip. But it was only when they told me about the exclusion I didnt see it as fair that technically I was playing for free at the expense of my money
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top