This is a perennial problem for the reasons Skiny cites, and it has always been difficult to get provider and/or operational management to even admit that there are such blacklists in online gambling.
I've always felt it is inherently unfair for anyone to unilaterally put you on a blacklist circulated to others without having to inform you or adduce a shred of evidence, and worse deny you the opportunity to appeal and present your side of the argument for independent and unbiased mediation.
There was a recent Panorama program here about "secret blacklists". It featured one found in the construction industry, and the ICO shut it down and levied fines when it was discovered. It had been running for YEARS, and a number of prior investigations had found nothing, so the construction industry had gotten away with it for years. It caused the government to strengthen the law on blacklists, they are now specifically illegal, however, the scope of this change may be limited to employment. There is a more general principle though, the ICO was able to act under existing laws, not because the blacklist was illegal to operate in itself, but because it breached individuals' data protection rights because it had no process for correcting bad data, nor appealing anything on it about oneself. This principle would also extend to blacklists within the casino industry. It's not just the keeper of the blacklist, but any USER, that the ICO can go after, so having the player blacklist operated from Panama will not help if an EU based casino used it to vet a customer.
Even the land casino blacklist of "card counters" was deemed illegal and had to be dismantled. It does not remove the right to deny service though, it just means that information cannot be passed to a central point and used to serve all participating casinos with lists of "card counters" to check for at the door.
In the case of negative entries in credit reference files, including for making chargebacks for getting out of paying for something, there is a requirement to remove said entry if the customer was legally in the right to make the claim against the merchant. Cases here have been where a company incorrectly invoices someone, and then lists them as a non payer with credit reference agencies for refusing to pay the incorrect invoice. Once the issue has been sorted out, and the debt not proven, the company is legally required to remove the negative entry, and thus no future potential creditor should see it.
Credit reference files have been found to contain many mistakes, and they have come under pressure to "clean up their act" from consumer groups in particular. I do not believe that these secret casino industry blacklists are any more accurate than the regulated credit reference lists, if anything, their accuracy is probably far worse.
that would be bad.
