Question Question regarding play after self exclusion

[winston]

Hi all,

I have been playing various online casinos for approximately 20 years on and off winning and losing in that time with no issues.

I recently signed up to one where I deposited and played through a total of £1600 over a period of 3-4 hours which I lost, unfortuantely.
When I signed in the following day I found my account closed. It seems after talking on live chat that this was because I'd self excluded 4 years ago from their site.

I have subsequently discovered that had I won they would not have paid out. This means I was unknowingly gambling with only one of two outcomes possible - losing or breaking even. Are these therefore valid bets in the sense that by their own admission they wouldn't have paid out on any wins.

Aside from the fact they allowed play despite an SE. Do you think I'd have reasonable grounds to file a complaint with the Casino concerned and does anyone think this has any chance of a favourable outcome (i.e a refund of deposits)?

Anyone experienced similar. Any advice and or thoughts appreciated.

 

[Harry_BKK]

If the casino is licensed in the UK then you have a good chance to get your deposits back as the regulation states that a casino has to void all bets and return the account to its original status, meaning as if you'd never played a single spin which equals then your total deposits.

Is the casino in question accredited here at CM? If yes, then click on i-gaming reps and look for their CM rep. Send him a PM (private message) with your case and ask for a refund of the deposits.

Reason i am saying is that the UK regulation says clearly that casinos have to have proper safeguards in place to make sure SE'ed players cannot play or register again with them or one of their sister sites.

 

[winston]

Thanks for posting. The website was Virgin Games. I'm not sure where they are registered but they have offices in uk.

 

[xxshepxx]

They have a UK licence which means they need to refund the deposits.

Im kinda swaying as to weather to do this @ Powerspins too. As I made £100's of deposits. And only after bringing a support error to light did they decide to ban me from the site.

Irresposible. And the safeguards were not in place. Not that I need any, I only SE'd at BGO because it was crap.

 

[winston]

I've had a look on the i-Gaming Reps list using link, however sadly I cannot find someone for Virgin Games listed

I've asked for the deposits back and it's been reviewed by a supervisor. I've taken the following excerpt from their response

"We will use all reasonable endeavours to ensure compliance with our responsible gaming self-exclusion policy. However you accept that the operator has no responsibility or liability whatsoever if you continue to deposit and wager using any additional not previously disclosed accounts and /or if you open up a new account with substantially the same personal registration information.

Should you register any accounts whilst the self-exclusion agreement is active, the operator reserves the right to void any winnings and withhold deposits, as to refund stakes that have been lost would be deemed a perverse incentive to gamble. The success of the self-exclusion facility relies on a large extent to which the member is committed to managing his or her behaviour. "

The wagers on your account were legitimate wagers that were played out successfully and there for are not refundable.

I'm not sure if it has a bearing on the outcome but I have moved house in the past four years and changed email address. Aside from this all other details were the same.

How would you guys recommend I proceed. Continue following their complaints procedure or something different.

I understand from both posts so far that the consensus is that their UK license dictates they should return deposits. Is this despite the deposits being played through?

I'd really appreciate any assistance with the best way forward.

 

[Playford7]

They have a UK licence which means they need to refund the deposits.

Im kinda swaying as to weather to do this @ Powerspins too. As I made £100's of deposits. And only after bringing a support error to light did they decide to ban me from the site.

Irresposible. And the safeguards were not in place. Not that I need any, I only SE'd at BGO because it was crap.

These places do as they please. Bgo banned me from bonus's as i complained. I agree they are terrible And you would get better support from a drunk monty python cast.
I once had to charge back to thrills, due to service so bad I couldn't explain, but this is still haunting me to this day, guts closed my account permanently because of it, no reason given.
If casinos where honest, and straight from the start we would have no problems, but hey ho that's the online slot world.
If you feel you where not given the product you purchased with your own cash then by all means dispute it.
We all would if we bought a new iPhone and we didn't get what was promised. Why the hell should a casino be any different????.

 

[redsfan]

My advice would be to wait for the supervisors response.

Then see which way the wind blows so to speak. Virgin are a reputable company.

 

[redsfan]

These places do as they please. Bgo banned me from bonus's as i complained. I agree they are terrible And you would get better support from a drunk monty python cast.
I once had to charge back to thrills, due to service so bad I couldn't explain, but this is still haunting me to this day, guts closed my account permanently because of it, no reason given.
If casinos where honest, and straight from the start we would have no problems, but hey ho that's the online slot world.
If you feel you where not given the product you purchased with your own cash then by all means dispute it.
We all would if we bought a new iPhone and we didn't get what was promised. Why the hell should a casino be any different????.

Do you think there are more dishonest casinos or more dishonest players?

 

[Playford7]

Do you think there are more dishonest casinos or more dishonest players?

A casino has the right to protect itself without question, they are a business and I don't dispute that.
They are a limited few out there that are fantastic, and honest. they are also those we all thought where above board and fantastic (casumo)
There will be dishonest players without doubt, and they can be easily found out.
Regarding dishonest casinos... pending withdrawl times (why?) oh because they can...
Terrible affiliation promotions that bother genuine players... (why?) because they can...
Terribly long kyc so the player plays back there winnings...(why?) because they can.
Few examples, but the majoroty lack ethics and honesty, I was told personally via email which I still have to keep a complaint I made private regarding a very very highly rated casino private...why?...oh because it brings there practices into question.
They will look after you if you spend big bucks, without question, or have a affiliate link. The average customer is usually kicked to the kerb though sadly.

 

[redsfan]

A casino has the right to protect itself without question, they are a business and I don't dispute that.
They are a limited few out there that are fantastic, and honest. they are also those we all thought where above board and fantastic (casumo)
There will be dishonest players without doubt, and they can be easily found out.
Regarding dishonest casinos... pending withdrawl times (why?) oh because they can...
Terrible affiliation promotions that bother genuine players... (why?) because they can...
Terribly long kyc so the player plays back there winnings...(why?) because they can.
Few examples, but the majoroty lack ethics and honesty, I was told personally via email which I still have to keep a complaint I made private regarding a very very highly rated casino private...why?...oh because it brings there practices into question.
They will look after you if you spend big bucks, without question, or have a affiliate link. The average customer is usually kicked to the kerb though sadly.

For every 1 dishonest player caught, 10 will slip through the net.

 

[winston]

My advice would be to wait for the supervisors response.

Then see which way the wind blows so to speak. Virgin are a reputable company.

The response above was from a supervisor.

 

[Playford7]

For every 1 dishonest player caught, 10 will slip through the net.

And?...
You not think the casino makes enough to cover any losses from a so called 'dis-honest player'...
I'm sure there 48 hour pending periods or or betting 3p over max bet, or even possibly asking people for paper evidence from there bank covers this?...
Not to mention charging for a deposit or withdrawal?....
or perhaps.... taking self excluded players money then refusing a refund?....
Not all, some are great casinos, very few but some.

 

[winston]

If you feel you where not given the product you purchased with your own cash then by all means dispute it.
We all would if we bought a new iPhone and we didn't get what was promised. Why the hell should a casino be any different????.

Do you think I should go down the chargeback route with my Visa. I used a debit card rather than credit. Hadn't even thought of this. Do you think it would be possible on the grounds that it wasn't fraudulent just not the product requested?

 

[Playford7]

Do you think I should go down the chargeback route with my Visa. I used a debit card rather than credit. Hadn't even thought of this. Do you think it would be possible on the grounds that it wasn't fraudulent just not the product requested?

Of course 110%
Although try to contact a rep should there be one, or a manager first at the casino.
Chargebacks are frowned upon, but if you get no joy from the casino itself, it's management or anyone here. Then by all means if You spent your hard earned money and didn't get what you paid for then your entitled to it back.
A online casino shouldn't be any different.
Contact your bank, provide them with the times and dates when you transferred your cash, inform them you need a chargeback, you will be emailed with a number to ring also a form to fill in and return.
May I say though make absolute total time to try and address this with the casino in question first as down the road you will encounter problems.
Best of luck.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Do you think I should go down the chargeback route with my Visa. I used a debit card rather than credit. Hadn't even thought of this. Do you think it would be possible on the grounds that it wasn't fraudulent just not the product requested?

Unfortunately, VG does not have a rep on CM.

Chargeback should be the very last option. Please ask support for their ADR details (Alternative Dispute Resolution). Every UK licensed has to have one in their T&C's but I couldn't find it on first glance. You can then send your case to that ADR which should decide in your favor.

One question though: Did you use different details to register the second account in order to circumvent the SE on the first one?

 

[Playford7]

Unfortunately, VG does not have a rep on CM.

Chargeback should be the very last option. Please ask support for their ADR details (Alternative Dispute Resolution). Every UK licensed has to have one in their T&C's but I couldn't find it on first glance. You can then send your case to that ADR which should decide in your favor.

One question though: Did you use different details to register the second account in order to circumvent the SE on the first one?

Harry with respect a ADR takes forever.
And agree a chargeback should be the last option, but with so many casinos literally doing as they please, then if a player has truly been out done from there own hard earned money they are entitled to that back.
As said before, you buy a product, for example I'll say a tv, a 50 inch tv, when you get that product delivered and it's a 40 inch tv, would you not want what you paid for for or a refund of your money if they can't provide this?...

 

[winston]

Unfortunately, VG does not have a rep on CM.

One question though: Did you use different details to register the second account in order to circumvent the SE on the first one?

Thanks for your post Harry
Not at all. According to casino I SE'd 4 years ago. In that time I've moved house and happen to use a different email address. Fed up of constant spam on old one.

I totally accept losing is part of gambling as much as winning is (within a fair framework/conditions. I just think in this instance there's a large degree of unfairness.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Harry with respect a ADR takes forever.
And agree a chargeback should be the last option, but with so many casinos literally doing as they please, then if a player has truly been out done from there own hard earned money they are entitled to that back.
As said before, you buy a product, for example I'll say a tv, a 50 inch tv, when you get that product delivered and it's a 40 inch tv, would you not want what you paid for for or a refund of your money if they can't provide this?...

Those are the regulations according to the UKGC:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Thanks for your post Harry
Not at all. According to casino I SE'd 4 years ago. In that time I've moved house and happen to use a different email address. Fed up of constant spam on old one.

I totally accept losing is part of gambling as much as winning is (within a fair framework/conditions. I just think in this instance there's a large degree of unfairness.

I assume your name, surname and birthday to be the same on both accounts. That should have raised flags at their end which seem to have failed. Different physical and email address is normal.

My recommendation is to contact support and ask for the ADR details. If they decline, than you can report them to the UKGC for failing to provide an ADR. Keep a copy of all communications, screenshot whatever you can with date and time.

It might take longer to get your money back, depending on who the ADR is, but at least your are playing it by the book.

 

[Playford7]

I assume your name, surname and birthday to be the same on both accounts. That should have raised flags at their end which seem to have failed. Different physical and email address is normal.

My recommendation is to contact support and ask for the ADR details. If they decline, than you can report them to the UKGC for failing to provide an ADR. Keep a copy of all communications, screenshot whatever you can with date and time.

It might take longer to get your money back, depending on who the ADR is, but at least your are playing it by the book.

Harry this is madness. The ADR service can take months as you know.
Contacting the UKGC is like a comical joke (no offence intended)
If the casino refuses to help the player then by all means that player should charge them back every single penny.
I cannot see a issue.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Harry this is madness. The ADR service can take months as you know.
Contacting the UKGC is like a comical joke (no offence intended)
If the casino refuses to help the player then by all means that player should charge them back every single penny.
I cannot see a issue.

To be honest we do not support chargebacks at CM, only if all other options have failed.

The regulations are very clear, hence the OP has all rights to get his money back the way it was designed by the UKGC, why resort to chargebacks?

 

[winston]

To be honest we do not support chargebacks at CM, only if all other options have failed.

The regulations are very clear, hence the OP has all rights to get his money back the way it was designed by the UKGC, why resort to chargebacks?

View attachment 78203

The statement in point 5 about returning funds. Do you think this still applies if the deposits were played and lost?

 

[Playford7]

To be honest we do not support chargebacks at CM, only if all other options have failed.

The regulations are very clear, hence the OP has all rights to get his money back the way it was designed by the UKGC, why resort to chargebacks?

View attachment 78203

I'm aware 'you at casinomeister' don't support chargebacks.
Neither do i.
Yet the adr is a waste of time and effort, also is the ukgc harry.
These places take your money happily, yet when a player has a issue they go awol.
Sorry, if the player hasn't had any response from the casino then by all means I'd happily say chargeback every penny you spent to them.
I did say to the op, the chargeback may have consequences, I also did say contact the casino, a rep if there was one first also.
These regulatory bodies are a waste of time and space.
Either the casino deals with a player who spent there own money or not.
If they don't charge them back every penny.

 

[winston]

I did say to the op, the chargeback may have consequences, .

If I do go down this route what would the consequences be? Sorry I've not done this before.

Thanks to both you and Harry for your time on this

 

[Playford7]

If I do go down this route what would the consequences be? Sorry I've not done this before.

Thanks to both you and Harry for your time on this

The casinos linked to there brand or license will stop you making a withdrawal, possibly close your account. Just play elsewhere at a better casino.

 

[Harry_BKK]

The statement in point 5 about returning funds. Do you think this still applies if the deposits were played and lost?

First paragraph says it pretty clear. They should have procedures in place to prevent you from gambling, which they obviously did not have. Hence, all bets are void.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I'm aware 'you at casinomeister' don't support chargebacks.
Neither do i.
Yet the adr is a waste of time and effort, also is the ukgc harry.
These places take your money happily, yet when a player has a issue they go awol.
Sorry, if the player hasn't had any response from the casino then by all means I'd happily say chargeback every penny you spent to them.
I did say to the op, the chargeback may have consequences, I also did say contact the casino, a rep if there was one first also.
These regulatory bodies are a waste of time and space.
Either the casino deals with a player who spent there own money or not.
If they don't charge them back every penny.

Sorry, that was badly written.

By saying ADR's are a waste of time, are you saying that sites like CasinoMeister and ThePogg, who helped to recover millions for players from around the world, are a waste of time?

The OP so far merely contacted the casino support once or twice regarding this issue. It is normal for a casino to react defensively since there are thousands of fraudster cashing in exactly on this SE regulation. And by the way, the UK ranks very high in the top10 countries with most fraudsters. Hence, I can see why Virgin Games does not throw money back to everyone shouting loud enough.

By using the designated ADR the OP will do it the proper way. By doing a chargeback he is taking the "wild west" approach. Your choice.

 

[brianmon]

View attachment 78203

Actually clause 5 relates to when an SE is initially requested, and is often misinterpreted.

It states that when an SE is requested by the customer, the account must be closed and any balance in the account returned

It does NOT state... when an SE has previously been requested by the customer, the account must be closed and any deposits returned

 

[Playford7]

Sorry, that was badly written.

By saying ADR's are a waste of time, are you saying that sites like CasinoMeister and ThePogg, who helped to recover millions for players from around the world, are a waste of time?

The OP so far merely contacted the casino support once or twice regarding this issue. It is normal for a casino to react defensively since there are thousands of fraudster cashing in exactly on this SE regulation. And by the way, the UK ranks very high in the top10 countries with most fraudsters. Hence, I can see why Virgin Games does not throw money back to everyone shouting loud enough.

By using the designated ADR the OP will do it the proper way. By doing a chargeback he is taking the "wild west" approach. Your choice.

I do hear what your saying and you are correct that is the correct approach.
I just feel the length of time the process takes can be to lengthy especially if a player has genuinely been wronged.
And charging back should only be used as a last resort, I do understand a casino has every right to defend itself, just like a business on a high street. The difference is though on a high street if you get faulty or damaged goods after purchase, there's never this much of a battle to get what you should have had in the first place having paid for it.
Sorry if I came across a bit militant there, no offence intended.
I like reading your posts, your very knowledgable and helpful to a lot of members and also a trusted member here.

 

[Leighh12345]

Same here

Hi I'm having the same issue with the same company I think. They let me open a new account with a sister site and tell me that because my address is slightly different that's why they didn't pick up on my self exclusion. I believe they should refund my money as they admit had I sent in documents they would have picked up on my previous self exclusion

 

[Playford7]

Hi I'm having the same issue with the same company I think. They let me open a new account with a sister site and tell me that because my address is slightly different that's why they didn't pick up on my self exclusion. I believe they should refund my money as they admit had I sent in documents they would have picked up on my previous self exclusion

Why is the address slightly different?
But if you have no idea that they are different sites, and you deported then yes they should of picked up on this and refund you the cash you deposted.

 

[mimi26]

I think the best way to approach this is to write to the casino manager with all the points Harry has linked tell them your intentions if it is not resolved by them immediately (going down ADR route),

A chargeback may get you banned from a number of casinos, be very careful

 

[Playford7]

I think the best way to approach this is to write to the casino manager with all the points Harry has linked tell them your intentions if it is not resolved by them immediately (going down ADR route),

A chargeback may get you banned from a number of casinos, be very careful

Definitely. One foolish chargeback I made before I discovered cm and the way things to do it the proper way last year is still causing me issues today ( even though the chargeback was justified I must add in this case)
If you can resolve it with the casino and listen to what harry says and you have the patience that's the best option.

 

[winston]

I think the best way to approach this is to write to the casino manager with all the points Harry has linked tell them your intentions if it is not resolved by them immediately (going down ADR route),

A chargeback may get you banned from a number of casinos, be very careful

Hi Mimi26,

After some thought, I think I'll go down this road - thanks for your post.
Do you know how I can find out the contact details of the Casino Manager? I cant find a name or any details on their site (or Google).
A supervisor replied to my request for their ADR details which I now have but I'd like to try appealing to the Manager before starting down this route.

Thanks to you and everyone who have taken the time to read and comment on my post offering support and advice. Equally if anyone has any experience with ADRs on anything similar I'd appreciate any pointers

 

[Harry_BKK]

Hi Mimi26,

After some thought, I think I'll go down this road - thanks for your post.
Do you know how I can find out the contact details of the Casino Manager? I cant find a name or any details on their site (or Google).
A supervisor replied to my request for their ADR details which I now have but I'd like to try appealing to the Manager before starting down this route.

Thanks to you and everyone who have taken the time to read and comment on my post offering support and advice. Equally if anyone has any experience with ADRs on anything similar I'd appreciate any pointers

Here is their complaints procedure. I would follow it to the "T" just to make sure you don't give them any reason to disqualify your case because of not following it.

Outdated URL (Invalid)

 

[Leighh12345]

The address to my home is flat2 ( I've lived here 25years) however when you register they have that drop down box where you select your address from your postcode and for some reason the only option for my address is flatb. That is the difference, they are trying to say I changed my address so they wouldn't have been able to pick up on it. I just feel relying on just someone 's address only is ridiculous because even gambling addicts move home!

 

[Leighh12345]

Hey Winston

I'm interested how you get on because My issue is with a sister site of virgin. Good luck.

 

[bnrightnw]

I have been through a similar process with Lucky 24/7. The issue with using an ADR is that they are unable to deal with any self exclusion cases. The gambling commission won't help, leaving your best option the small claims court. If they have a UK address (which To Play Central t/a Lucky 24/7 do not).

Your case is cut and dry, I'd call them out.

 

[Leighh12345]

Well my case has sort of been resolved. They called me offering 50% of my deposits back as they feel that are a bit responsible for not recognising my self excluded status! I would have like all my deposits back. It it's better than nothing. I still feel they should have caught me but they say for a self exclusion to be flagged up 5 points have to match which I think is ridiculous tbh

 

[winston]

Well my case has sort of been resolved. They called me offering 50% of my deposits back as they feel that are a bit responsible for not recognising my self excluded status! I would have like all my deposits back. It it's better than nothing. I still feel they should have caught me but they say for a self exclusion to be flagged up 5 points have to match which I think is ridiculous tbh

What had you done up to that point if you don't me asking? In other words what stage in their complaints procedure.
Also, what do you mean by 5 points?

 

[vinylweatherman]

This is something the UKGC are keen to tackle. They are unhappy at how the current SE procedures work (or not in many cases) as they say the aim should be to prevent the gambling from the start, not to selectively void winnings but keep quiet when the player loses.

Since the casino brought up the SE, not the player, they have somewhat dropped themselves right in it, and this means that the player should get all their deposits back. It's pretty clear that they had all the information needed to identify SE on this account even though the original SE was 4 years ago, so they should have used this information to prevent play as soon as the account was registered.

Next year, there will no longer be the situation where a player can be on an SE at one site, yet happily playing at others, and worried about fighting too hard over the one SE issue in case they get shut out by all the other casinos. This will be achieved by an industry wide SE system that should mean that when a player self excludes from any one site, they are automatically excluded from all sites with a UK licence.

This could have an unexpected downside for casinos, as players who feel they have been cheated because had they won they would not have been paid, but had they lost the casino would have taken the opposite view and claimed all the bets were valid, are afraid to use things like Chargeback because this will likely mean getting banned across the industry. Now, it's funny that the industry can manage to implement an industry wide blacklist for chargebacks, yet are complaining to the UKGC that an industry wide self exclude database is "too difficult and costly" to implement. Fortunately, it seems the UKGC are having none of it, and are pressing ahead with plans for this industry wide SE system some time in 2018.

The UKGC have realised that there is a real problem with the current SE procedures because ADRs have been told to refer all SE related issues up to the UKGC, who have been inundated. This is not something they had anticipated when telling ADRs not to get involved with SE related issues.

 

[Leighh12345]

Hi winston I just emailed them a few times. I asked for my deposits back as they did not pick up on my previous self exclusion. A lady from their company rang me and spoke to me about it, and offered me 50% back because I had " changed" my address ( check out earlier post) and I'd included my middle name. She was very nice!

Basically she said her company checks 5 points to make sure someone hasn't self excluded from their sites etc address, name,dob,email and phone number I think ( I think they are the 5 points).

I would email support first or phone them up before anything else because I think they would rather deal with your issue without going through the complaints process. I'm not promising that they will do what you want but I think you should give it a go. I hope it goes well.

 

[Leighh12345]

Should I have settled?

I was wondering was I stupid to settle for 50% of my deposits back? I haven't received it all yet!

 

[slotter999]

Actually clause 5 relates to when an SE is initially requested, and is often misinterpreted.

It states that when an SE is requested by the customer, the account must be closed and any balance in the account returned

It does NOT state... when an SE has previously been requested by the customer, the account must be closed and any deposits returned

I believe this is correct. I've experienced this first hand after being ripped off by everymatrix who flat out refused to return all of my deposits across all of their brands after self excluding from one about a year prior.

The ADR request will likely be declined due to them not viewing this as something they can arbitrate on. You could try someone like the Pogg though and see what they say? I think I used IBAS who didn't help.

You can also forget about the UKGC. Even asking them a basic question clarifying the correct interpretation of their rules will likely result in nothing. The moment you mention anything to do with money they will likely inform you they cannot get involved and it would be a matter for the courts.

Which leaves you with the option of last resort, and perhaps the only option really (assuming you cannot reach an agreement with the casino) which is taking them to court for the money. As far as I'm aware this has not been fully tested in court which seems bizarre given how much of this must go on. There is one case where money was won from everymatrix but it was won a technicality.

The strange thing is the self exclusion stuff is supposedly the cause of a lot of player fraud because of the returning of deposits so I can only assume they are targeting casinos who will refund deposits as a matter of course which certainly wouldn't​ be any everymatrix casino.

I'd very much like to be corrected on any of the above. I'm particularly interested in anything regarding this being tested in a UK court.

Good luck and I hope you get your money.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Court would be "balance of probability", and it would depend on whether the casino followed the rules properly or cut corners in the interests of keeping new sign-ups.

If they have a 5 point check, and they can show that the player used a variant of their name and their new address to slip through, they could argue they did everything possible to prevent the player from playing, so were not negligent. This would probably work for the casino in a case where a player signs up and plays, but then pulls the self exclusion argument to get their money back because they lost. However, when it's the casino that accepts the play, and then refuses to honour the win because it discovers a self exclusion, the player doesn't get paid, so it should also mean that in the same situation, but where the player lost, the casino should also void all the bets and refund the deposits.
If the CASINO causes the "change of address" by having an incorrect postcode/address database, then this isn't the players' fault, it is down to a failure at the casino's end. Middle names are also a problem caused by the industry through inconsistent registration forms. Most do not provide the option for players to enter a middle name, hence this isn't recorded for that account, however others insist upon it, so this sets up the situation where something like a 5 point matching check is bound to fail.

It's a problem the UKGC have inadvertently created, they have banned ADRs from resolving self exclusion cases, but they have not put anything in it's place, and the UKGC are not equipped to manage the task themselves. The UKGC have copped out of their responsibilities and told players to use the courts, yet if it wasn't for the UKGC implementing these flawed self exclusion procedures, this would be something that ADRs would be able to look at.

This means that CASINOS get to make illicit profit by using self exclusion as a means to have a "free ride" at the expense of some players. They will take the bets, which are valid when the casino wins but voided when the player wins. This is a conflict of interest that incentivises casinos to delay self exclusion checks until a player makes their first withdrawal.

Hopefully 2018 will see a lessening of the current shambles with the national self exclusion database. However, this will rely on all UK licenced casinos standardising their registration procedures so that they capture the same information fields in the same format, such as ALL with middle names, and ALL using the same postcode/address database so that "Flat 2" doesn't become "Flat b" in a few casinos.

One thing they COULD do for UK players is to use National Insurance numbers as a registration field. Whilst this might cause concern due to it being such an important and sensitive piece of personal information, it has one major benefit when it comes to industry wide databases. UK citizens are given this number at the age of 16 (migrants who take UK citizenship are also given a NI number at this point), and this number is kept until death. This means it is a piece of uniquely identifying information that does not change no matter how often someone changes their address, ISP, computer, etc. It would make for a very strong point in any multi point data matching algorithm.

 

[xxshepxx]

Powerspins told me that it was my fault as when I joined powerspins (2 years after SE at Bgo) I used different details...

I had a look over this....and all that changed was my address, which did change in that 2 years.

Full of crap...these guys bend the rules to suit themselves. They can take take take....but whe you win they say they dont need to pay out due to SE at sister site and deposits dont need refunded as I had changed details...smh

 

[vinylweatherman]

Powerspins told me that it was my fault as when I joined powerspins (2 years after SE at Bgo) I used different details...

I had a look over this....and all that changed was my address, which did change in that 2 years.

Full of crap...these guys bend the rules to suit themselves. They can take take take....but whe you win they say they dont need to pay out due to SE at sister site and deposits dont need refunded as I had changed details...smh

This just shows how poor the current system is. It should not fail just because someone moves house as this is very common. The aim of SE is to protect people who have a problem controlling their gambling, who by definition CANNOT manage this through their own willpower. Casinos seem to be treating SE as just another term to protect the casino against "bonus abuse", and are implementing it in much the same way they implement bonus bans from one site across their sister sites to ensure that bonus banned players can't simply sign up at the sisters with minor variations in their details in order to slip through the bonus ban net.

 

[xxshepxx]

This just shows how poor the current system is. It should not fail just because someone moves house as this is very common. The aim of SE is to protect people who have a problem controlling their gambling, who by definition CANNOT manage this through their own willpower. Casinos seem to be treating SE as just another term to protect the casino against "bonus abuse", and are implementing it in much the same way they implement bonus bans from one site across their sister sites to ensure that bonus banned players can't simply sign up at the sisters with minor variations in their details in order to slip through the bonus ban net.

Indeed..

I mean I SE'd at BGO years ago because imo they were crap, had no promos and there was loads of better places to play...and I was also uneducated as to the implications of self exclusion and how it would evolve.

But yes as you say, surely a person signing up with the same name, d.o.b. e-mail address, same security question answer bla bla bla should trigger the SE database and say that the user has SE'd from the group previously.

In short tbh I was oblivious to the fact that I may have had issues withdrawing, but it now feels like money wasted that could have been used elsewhere...

Do we think I should be claimig deposits back? I did pm the rep a few weeks ago but it was the rep who stated my details had changed so I was in effect on to plums.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Indeed..

I mean I SE'd at BGO years ago because imo they were crap, had no promos and there was loads of better places to play...and I was also uneducated as to the implications of self exclusion and how it would evolve.

But yes as you say, surely a person signing up with the same name, d.o.b. e-mail address, same security question answer bla bla bla should trigger the SE database and say that the user has SE'd from the group previously.

In short tbh I was oblivious to the fact that I may have had issues withdrawing, but it now feels like money wasted that could have been used elsewhere...

Do we think I should be claimig deposits back? I did pm the rep a few weeks ago but it was the rep who stated my details had changed so I was in effect on to plums.

I would argue that their system having fallen over simply because you had moved house demonstrates that they have failed to implement a sufficiently robust SE system that meets CURRENT regulatory guidelines, and that you feel that since they would have discovered the SE had you won and withdrawn, you will be expecting the return of your deposits as per UKGC guidance to players and operators.

There IS a bluff element to this, but only because of the inadequacies of the current system and the wriggle room in the current rules about refunds of deposits when players lose.

With the new system, it is intended that a SE request from a player at any one site will mean they will be irrevocably excluded from all sites until the expiry of their initially chosen period, which will be at least 5 years. It is also intended that there be no means by which players can have "second thoughts" over a previous SE, so even if they change their minds 3 years later, they will still have to serve the 5 year exclusion.

As such, players should NOT Self Exclude merely as a means to get back at rude CS staff, or due to a tantrum over a bad session or poor promotions. SE means "I feel I am not in control, I need help".

 

[Playford7]

The whole SE safeguard is a farce, as is the one regarding chargebacks.
The whole industry needs regulating correctly, this won't happen though anytime soon sadly.
I've literally because of this lately limited my play to 2 casinos, past months I've deposited at a few caddell, powerspins and unibet.
Then I thought the more of these random places I deposit at the more chance of some past closed account or bad experience.
So I'm sticking solely to 2 where I 100% know I've no issues or will face a problem in the future.