Crazy Fox - not taking self-exclusion seriously

Hello again, hope all is well. I have now sent out a email that Spinia, in their on words, when they banned me knew i had gambling problems. It was not only that I had self excluded before. They knew it. And then I could go on and on and play on new N1 casinos. The fact that they knew, and all the self bans, which lead to nothing. I could just continue play. I would like to claim all net losses from these casinos after Spinia, as they are all in the same license. Is this possible or do I have to open up more claims? [EDIT]

Hi simonp - welcome to ThePOGG.com!

As we are the ADR for the N1 Interactive Ltd license under the Malta Gaming Authority license there is certain information we have to provide you now.

You can find all the relevant information about this service here – http://thepogg.com/terms-of-use/ and the terms of use for our complaint service here - https://thepogg.com/terms-of-use-for-dispute-resolution-service/

To summarise.

– Use of this service does not preclude your seeking redress through court proceedings .

– This service is free to use for both the complainant and operator.

– At any point during the procedure the submitting party retains the right to withdraw their complaint. This does not preclude our right to continue the discussion with the involved operator of general issues related to the complaint (i.e. insufficiently clear terms and conditions).

– You are not obliged to obtain independent or legal advice or representation, though you may choose to do so.

If you have any questions about the above, let me know.

I'll contact the license holder and see what we can find out. There is no need to open further complaint files.

ThePOGG

Hi simonp,

Do you have any record of the communication with Spinia on the 30/05/2019 when you were told your self-exclusion would be applied across the license?

Thanks,

ThePOGG

Hello ThePOGG,

when I registred on BobCasino, the TOS I am quite sure stated that one self exlucsion / gambling ban goes for all. Therefore, after Spinia came to the conclusion that I have a gambling problem, I should have been banned from all the other casinos. But no, I dont have that record.

But as you know yourself, they have changed the tos, but as recently as this complain I was told in a chat with suport on N1 owned casinos that one self ban would led to termination to all. How can they say that and then not hold up to their promise?

As stated on the picture I now sent out to you, I was told that after the self-exlusion, I would not be allowed to play on other casinos with the same e-mail, but I clearly could. How can you make such a statement and then not need to hold up to it?

Hi simonp,

Can you please forward your records of the recent chat you had with N1 casino to [email protected]?

Thanks,

ThePOGG

Hi, email has been sent to you now. [EDIT]

Any update? [EDIT]

Hello, I would like to point to this thread as a https://thepogg.com/complaint/spinia-self-exclusion-2/ prejudicate why my case should be given as they are very similar. Close time frame, same problem, even more pointing for me in the way that Spinia had already concluded that I had a gambling problem. Best regards [EDIT]

Hello, thepogg! At 16december 2019 I also self excluded at EUslot, with the timeframe "for ever". In their tos it to this day still states that I should have been disallowed to play on any other casinos under the same license. This was not the case, as it has been many times over. "Setting Self-exclusion lets us know that we need to take all measures to block your access to your account and make sure that you receive no promotional materials. You may also contact our support team at support[@]euslot.com and inform us about your decision to stop gambling at the Website for a certain period of time or forever. Self-exclusion due to gambling problems means that you will be barred from play at all online casinos under the participating licence." euslot.com/terms-and-conditions 2020-04-09 Email with proof of self exlusion and screenshot of euslots tos has been ssent to you.

I am very sorry for spamming this thread, even thought you have not come in with a update. But I find another rule pointing to my case. Here is the rule from the Player Protection Directive 2 MGA : "Provided that, in the absence of a unified self-barring database, if the brands require separate player registration, where the B2C licensee operates multiple brands, the B2C licensee may allow for self-exclusion to be limited to a player’s activity on the brand on which the player has requested self-exclusion, and the above sub-articles (a) and (b) shall be applicable to that individual brand. Provided further that, in the event that a player has been excluded by the B2C licensee in light of sufficient reasons which indicate that the player may have problem gambling issues, that player shall be excluded across all brands operated by the B2C licensee." As pointed towards the end of that text, if the player in "sufficient reasons indicate that the player may have gambling issues" he shall be banned acrosss all brands. There are many things pointing that that evidence was there, but most obvious: *Spinia banning me stating "you have showed gambling problems" (this has been sent to your email). *All the other self-bans. Best regards [EDIT]

Im in talk with most of the casinos it seems like im getting a refund. Will update

Hi simonp,

Yes, our understanding is that will happen but we are awaiting conformation from the operator that it has happened.

Thanks,

ThePOGG

Hello,

most have refunded me but I think I have not gotten anything from:

N1Casino

And Maneki

Hi simonp,

We have been informed that your N1 refund has now been processed. As you withdrew more than you deposited at Maneki no refund would be due from this operator.

Please let us know when you receive your funds.

Thanks,

ThePOGG

Hello,

everything has come in.

This case can now be closed.

Thank you so much for your help.

Hi simonp,

Thanks for letting us know - it is appreciated.

ThePOGG