PlayGrand - Refund

Hi Ashleybarker90 - welcome to ThePOGG.com!

I'll contact the operator and see what we can find out for you.

Thanks,

ThePOGG

Hi Ashleybarker90,

I've spoken with the operator about this issue and unfortunately we're not going to be able to uphold your claim. There are multiple facets to this case which I will go through individually.

1) The Self-Exclusion request - On the 6th of July this year you contacted Spinland casino stating that the activity on your account was unauthorised and that it was not you who registered the account. This is despite the details on the account matching those on the other accounts that you'd registered across this network. You also informed the operator that you'd informed your bank, presumably to initiate a charge back of the contested transactions.

At this point the operator locked all your accounts on this network. This wasn't due to a Self-Exclusion but due to the fact that you'd informed the operator directly that the activity on your account and using your payment method was not initiated by you. At the same time they advised you to report the unauthorised transactions to the police and to forward on the relevant police report to them to initiate an investigation into whether or not a refund was due.

There is no evidence that these closures were in any way related to a self-exclusion request.

After this you went on to sign-up accounts with PlayGrand, Dream Jackpots and Cyber Club.

2) The UKGC requires operators to offer a range of Responsible Gambling tools. Alongside allowing for players to Self-Exclude for longer periods of time, they require operators to provide shorter length 'Time Outs' for use where a player feels they are only at risk for a shorter period. The UKGC do no require operators to consider every player who requests a shorter Time Out type exclusion to be a problem gambler.

On the 31/10 you contacted PlayGrand and expressed a wish to not be allowed to cancel the withdrawal you had placed, stating specifically "Can you please put my account on time out Until funds are clear". The Live Chat representative responds by suggesting a temporary lock for a minimum of 7 days. This lock is then actioned on your account, your withdrawal is paid on the 3/11 and your account automatically reopened on the 7/11. This is all in line with the UKGC license conditions.

Your subsequent losses are only slightly larger than the win that you have been paid directly beforehand and as such would not qualify as of direct concern of playing more than you could afford.

3) On the 4/12 you contacted PlayGrand casino to complain stating that you believed them to be owned by William Hill and stating that you had previous excluded with William Hill. Unfortunately, while the share initials, William Hill and White Hat Gaming are two entirely separate companies, so an exclusion at William Hill would not carry over to White Hat Gaming properties.

At this point, as you'd informed the operator that you had Self-Excluded with another group, the operator manually actioned a 5 year Self-Exclusion at all White Hat Gaming properties.

In summary of the above: your previous account closures were due to your claims of fraudulent activity on accounts registered in your name, your use of the Time Out tool was in line with the UKGC license, the losses you experienced were in line with the wins that you experienced and as such would not be considered exceptional or concerning and as soon as the operator became aware of your Self-Exclusion at another group they took appropriate action to prevent you engaging further gaming activities with them.

For the reasons stated above unfortunately you are not entitled to a refund of losses.

Sorry we couldn't be of more help,

ThePOGG

I completely disagree with your decision. I would also like to come back to the point spinland has nothing to do with it it is 21casino to which i had self excluded and the attachment i showed you proves that. The fact that the money from the winnings went straight back into the casino shows my issue with gambling. I would also like to point out if i was locked out of 21casino then i should not have been allowed to open a playgrand casino. I have never heard of dream jackpots or cyber club. The fact this casino allowed me to open another account considering all the claims of fraud is totally wrong as well and not one of them has asked for my i.d. not even playgrand after depositting 7.5k into my account. Therefore they are not properly complying with the regulations anyway. With that alone i demand to be refunded or i will take further action. You also state that they became aware of my self exclusion at another group then took appropiate action why was this not picked up on as soon as i registered? Times out you state are for players who feel they at risk for only a short amount of time. All i can say to that is what a bunch of crap. If you are at risk for a short period of time you are always at risk. I demand that playgrand casino refund me all the money i depositted. Otherwise i will be contacting solicitors and taking them to court.

Hi Ashleybarker90,

I'm sorry you feel that way but the regulations are clear in this regard and on a personal level I entirely agree with having different levels of restriction for players who have different needs. You asked for a Time Out and it was made very clear to you at the time that the restriction would only remain in place for 7 days. Your concern was made explicit that you did not want to be able to cancel your withdrawal. You did not express any other concerns about controlling your action after this time nor did you request any further restrictions.

As to restrictions with another group - I've been clear about this. White Hat Gaming would have no way of knowing about your Self-Exclusion at William Hill. These are entirely different companies. When YOU informed White Hat Gaming that you'd previously Self-Excluded at William Hill, specifically because you'd mistaken them for the same company, White Hat Gaming viewed this, correctly, as a clear sign of a gambling issue and closed all your account. They would have had no grounds to take this action before you made them aware of it.

Spinland and 21Casino are both operated by White Hat Gaming. You claim to have Self-Excluded on the 7th of July. The operators in question have provided your communications from the 6th of July showing that you claimed there was fraudulent activity on your accounts. They closed your currently open accounts at that time due to these claims, not a request for a Self-Exclusion at 21Casino. The operator is under no obligation at that stage to refuse your custom in future. They took this action to ensure that if someone had unlawfully accessed your accounts that they were prevented from doing so further. Likewise it would be your responsibility to take the necessary action to ensure that your payment providers were informed and the necessary steps were taken to change your details. If the operator felt at that point that you were a fraud risk they could choose to prevent you accessing their services in future. But equally if they feel this has been a mistake or that your claim may be genuine and someone else has taken actions using your name they would be within their rights to accept your custom in future.

Your loss cannot be considered as relevant for two reasons:

i) No indications of problems were given before the loss occurred barring a request for a time out that was actioned appropriately.

ii) The loss is proportionately reasonable compared to the wins you had experienced and as such your lifetime results would not move into a concerning bracket during this period.

I'm sorry you're disappointed with our conclusions and you should feel free to take whatever further action you feel is appropriate, but I have been clear about the reasons for this ruling. There are no ground for us to pursue a return of your losses from the operator.

Finally if you're still concerned about your gambling activities I would encourage you to consider installing one of the filtering softwares that will prevent you accessing a wide range of gambling related sites. You can find more information about these on our Responsible Gambling page.

ThePOGG

So if you look at the documentation i sent you. The person at 21casino clearly stated that i had asked for them to close the account on that date. Therefore they have admitted that i had fpr that account to be closed. Which also proves white hat gaming knew of my gambling problem.

Hi Ashleybarker90,

Firstly, you haven't sent us anything. I confirmed that via our email server.

Secondly, an agent making a error in telling you the reason your account was closed does not change the reason your account was closed. I have YOUR email claiming that the activity on your accounts was fraudulent. This is dated before you claimed to have requested a self-exclusion. The operator closed your accounts at that point and I have the notes on the accounts alongside the timestamp of when those notes were added to show that it was before you claim to have requested a self-exclusion. Your accounts were closed before the 7th.

Alongside this asking for an account closure does not automatically qualify for the account to be considered closed under 'Responsible Gambling' policies. If you have evidence that you actually asked for a "self-exclusion" or clearly told the operator that you have a gambling problem and cannot control your own actions, please forward it on to [email protected]. Otherwise there's nothing further we can do to help you.

ThePOGG

I thought i had attached a screenshot of the conversation. How do i forward that to you? I wouldnt agree with the fact it is a mistake by them. Unfortunately 21casino never sent an email confirming the self exclusion nor have they since this complaint confirming they are not complying with the regulations. The fact is i asked for that account to be closed i.e self excluded. Clearly this casino is not being honest with you and there is little i can do to prove that as i was not expecting this situation so have not screenshotted asking to be self.excluded.

Though you said my accounts were closed before the 7th july. Yet playgrand casino still allowed me to open an account after this? Also this screen shot shows i had asked for.this to be closed on the 7th july?

Hi Ashleybarker90,

Again - a request for closure is NOT the same as telling the operator you have a gambling problem. Players close their accounts for a whole variety of reasons. Most often because they are unhappy with the service of feel they aren't getting the bonus they want. Unless you have made clear that the reason for your closure request is because you don't feel you can control your gambling the operator would not be expected to apply a Self-Exclusion on your accounts and only the account that you directly requested be closed would be closed.

And yes, as explained above, your accounts THAT WERE OPEN AT THE TIME were closed as they were considered to be a security risk. You stated you were not the one acting on them. The accounts were NOT closed due to Responsible Gambling protocols but to protect YOU against financial crimes/identity theft. This was a protection measure intended to prevent whoever was accessing your accounts from causing you further financial damage. You opened the PlayGrand account AFTER this point.

If you have a screen shot to send forward it to [email protected].

ThePOGG

Please be so rude and treat me like i am dumb. I had asked to be SELF EXCLUDED as i have said on several on occasions however they are DENYING this. I have forwarded the screenshot that shows i had communicated with them on the 7th and HAD made them aware of my problem gambling.

Have you now recieved the evidence of.my self exclusion? Can you now see my point and why this casino should refund me

Hi Ashleybarker90,

I'm sorry you feel that way, but at no point have I been rude or implied you were "dumb".

Yes we've received the screenshot. I'm afraid this does not verify your claims. Specifically the conversation states:

"[SUPPORT AGENT] - team is undergoing checks.

[YOU] - I asked for this account to be closed months ago

[SUPPORT AGENT] - I do see this was done in July 2017

[SUPPORT AGENT] - I do not have authority to reopen the account

[YOU] - Thank you I dont want it reopened"

In the first instance, as I've stated previously, asking for an account closure is a different thing to asking for a Self-Exclusion. One implies dissatisfaction with the service, the other acknowledges an inability to control your impulses. A Self-Exclusion asks the company to take responsibility for your actions and financial losses. For them to be legally expected to do that there has to clear grounds in the form of either a direct request or significantly and obviously worrying behaviour. I'm afraid all that you state and the agent acknowledges here is that your account was "closed".

Secondly the agent doesn't confirm a date, they simply state that "this was done in July 2017", which would be in line with the date of the 6th where you did tell this operator that there had been fraudulent transactions on your account. This also explains why the support agent does not have the authority to reopen your account.

In summary, I'm afraid that screen shot does not give any indication that a Self-Exclusion was ever actioned.

Sorry,

ThePOGG

How do i go above the pogg? As far as im concerned 21casino are lying and you are only supporting them. At the time of using the word closed i was not aware of difference otherwise i would have used tbe term self excluded as that is what i asked for.

Hi Ashleybarker90,

We are no part of any official complaints policy for PlayGrand casino. We are no authority figure in this case. We review complaints voluntarily for players to help them get their money when they are right. There is no 'above' us as we fall outside any authority vested chain. Any action the operator may take at our request/advice is done so voluntarily.

While I sympathise with your frustrations and you're clearly upset by the loss you've experienced, we are supporting the operator based on the facts of this case, facts that are verified by both the operator and your own submissions. I would also point out that there is a huge difference between the operator lying and simply not extending the communicated intent beyond the literal word used, in this case "closed", to what you seem to have intended, that being "I have a gambling problem". One is intentionally dishonest and the other is interpreting what you communicated by it's literal meaning and the meaning that thousands of other players intend across the industry every month. That literal meaning does not indicate that you are a problem gambler. Without that the operator cannot be expected to treat you as a problem gambler or take responsibility for your actions.

At the present time eCOGRA are listed as the ADR responsible for PlayGrand. I would suggest approaching them, though I will state in advance that as far as I am currently aware UKGC appointed ADRs do not appear to be dealing with Responsible Gambling type complaints. If that turns out to be the case your next step should be, as you indicated a preference for previously, to contact a solicitor and pursuing this issue via the courts.

My last comment on this issue would be to once again encourage you to consider installing one of the filtering softwares that will prevent you accessing a wide range of gambling related sites. You can find more information about these on our Responsible Gambling page.

Sorry we couldn't be of more help,

ThePOGG

Even still if they are saying my account was closed on a security concern than it is not exactly duty of care by allowing further deposits if there is a security concerns and potential fraud. So either way they should not have allowed that account to be opened. Im not frustrated at the loss at all im frustrated at the fact they wont admit i had self excluded from 21 casino which at the time on 7th july i had used the term self exclude due to my gambling issue then they never sent an email or anything. They have absolutely lied in this case.

Hi Ashleybarker90,

As explained already, the duty of care would be to themselves not you. They closed the accounts that you reported had fraudulent activity, so that whoever it was that was using your details without your permission could not cause you further damage. They then told you to contact your bank to report the issue so that unauthorised activity could no longer occur on your payment methods.

When, a month later, further accounts are signed up in your name using payment details that are tied to you, it's absolutely reasonable for the operator to assume that you've taken the necessary actions to protect your own financial instruments and that the payments being made are now legitimate and authorised by you. The other options are that despite having identified someone else using your payment details and them having made significant transactions, you chose to not report this issue to your bank allowing this to happen again or that in fact the original transactions were in fact authorised by you despite your email communication on the 6th and as such you did not want to report the transactions to the bank.

So far there is no evidence to support your claims that the operator has hidden anything. I will however make one final effort and ask the operator to provide all

communication with you surrounding these dates. However, as I've already pointed out, as the account in question had been closed on the 6th of July, which has been proved, you would not have been able to access your account on the 7th so there would be no reason for you to request a Self-Exclusion at this juncture.

ThePOGG

Hi Ashleybarker90,

I've now received and gone through ALL of your communications with operators run by WHG - over 100 pages of email and chat transcripts. There is no evidence to support a Self-Exclusion being requested by you at any point. As detailed above the original account closures were enacted due to your communications to the operator indicating that you did not authorise the payments in question. You seem to indicate that this may not be the case in your more recent communications with the operator. After the account that were open at that time were closed, you subsequently opened accounts with other operators within the WHG group. After a win you requested a 7 day Time Out while your withdrawal was processed. This was enforced correctly. Finally, after a significant loss (approximately the same amount as your win) you contact the group again as you believed them to be associated with William Hill where you have Self-Excluded. Upon seeing that you've Self-Excluded with another group the operator took the appropriate action and Self-Excluded you across their entire platform.

The screen shot of the Live Chat that you rely on to demonstrate that you Self-Excluded the account has been taken out of context in two regards:

i) You state "I asked for the account to be closed months ago" and the operator responds "I do see this was done in July 2017". In the first instance the operator simply confirms that the account was closed in 2017, they do not confirm that you requested this closure or that the closure was a Self-Exclusion.

ii) You state that you asked for the account to be "closed", not Self-Excluded. As has been explained to you there are different protocols operators have to adhere to depending on what the player requests. A request to close an account would not activate Responsible Gambling policies. While the Live Chat operative confirms that they do not have the authority to reopen the account, as the account was closed due to fraud concerns a Live Chat operator would not be able to re-open an account.

I'm sorry but I cannot find any evidence to support you having asked for a Self-Exclusion at any point over the course of your interactions with this group. As such we can be of no further help.

ThePOGG