PlayAMo - Self exclusion ignored

Hi goneinsane - welcome to ThePOGG.com!

Please ensure you have read our Complaint Guidance to ensure that you fully understand how our complaint management process functions.

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.

Do you have copies of your communications with the operator about this matter?

Thanks,

ThePOGG

I have emails but not copies of the live chat.

I have since received another offer of bonus to stay, I have not accepted or replied.

I have emails but not copies of the live chat.

I have since received another offer of bonus to stay, I have not accepted or replied.

Hi goneinsane,

Please forward on the emails you have to [email protected].

Thanks,

ThePOGG

Hi goneinsane,

I'm following-up on the above?

Thanks,

ThePOGG

I have forwarded some emails but there were communication via email prior to what I have forwarded but I'm currently unable to locate them.

Regards

Hi goneinsane,

Thank you for your email.

Having reviewed then, sadly they do not make a strong claim in this case. The first point where you clearly tell the operator that this is a responsible gambling issue is on the 14/04 where you state "After several unsuccessful attempts at excluding my account and being able to deposit despite me telling you I had spent too much". Prior to this, where the email chain shows requests for closures, they indicate dissatisfaction with the results of play/incentives being offered as opposed to any statement that could reasonably be interpreted as you experiencing gambling harm.

This communication came AFTER you submitted your complaint here and as such is non-applicable for contesting funds played before this point.

If there are other exchanges with the operator that you feel are relevant to this claim, it will make building a case on your behalf far easier if you locate and provide these.

There is an issue on the 8th of April where promotional incentives were offered in response to a statement that you wished to stop playing that we can look into, but again, as this is the same day as you submitted your claim to this service, it is unlikely to have any bearing on the fund total that you included with your submission.

Thanks,

ThePOGG

Thanks for the update, would copies of emails/chat prior to what I sent be available from playamo if you requested them? It would appear I have deleted them as I'm unable to locate the previous communications.

Hi goneinsane,

We can and will ask, but having a record of what has been communicated directly from the player allows us to build a case when there is inconsistency between the communications the player claims have occurred and those that the operator provide.

Thanks,

ThePOGG

I understand that, I have forwarded you the copies sent by playamo of the online chats (if memory serves me correct there are some chats missing), I have requested emails as I've accidentally deleted some my end but as yet they have not been received.

Regards

Hi, emails have now been received and forwarded to you for inspection.

Thanks

Hi goneinsane,

We have to offer you an apology. I made an error, confusing Betamo - and MGA licensed operator - and Playamo, a sister property that operates on a Curacao license. The differential is both where we act as an ADR (only for the MGA licensed operator) and in terms of the licensing requirements that the operator are subject to.

So, we cannot act as an ADR for Playamo.

With regard to your complaint, your communications with the operator do not directly state that your requests to close are gambling addiction related until after the point of this complaint. Even under the MGA licensing system these would not qualify you for self-exclusion protections.

Your request to close your account are met by bonus offers. Under the MGA licensing system that would be an unacceptable practice. The Curacao licensing system - which is the one that is relevant - places no restrictions on this practice.

While we would be uncomfortable with this practice, which is why we work with very few Curacao licensed operators and Playamo hold a negative status with this service, the bottom line is that the operator has not done anything in this instance that would be consider to breach what is required of them by their license.

Sorry we could not be of further help.

ThePOGG

Thanks for the update, I appreciate your help.

Is there any point me trying to pursue this with any other avenues.

Hi goneinsane,

While we appreciate your frustration, there's not much more that we can suggest. You could try submitting your claim to other services - perhaps they may have a more positive relationship with the operator and be able to exert more leverage on them - but my honest expectation would be that it is unlikely to end in a positive outcome for you.

ThePOGG