Jeg poster dette for at advare andre og for at dokumentere en uafklaret klage mod 1Red Casino.
Jeg er bosiddende i Holland. Selvom 1Red hævder, at de ikke accepterer spillere fra visse jurisdiktioner, er dette kun delvist sandt. Deres primære hjemmeside (1red.com) anvender geo-blokering, men deres spejlwebsteder (såsom 1red2.com) gør ikke. Gennem disse spejlwebsteder kan spillere fra lande med restriktioner registrere sig, indbetale og spille uden varsel eller begrænsninger.
Dette er, hvad der skete i mit tilfælde.
Jeg kunne frit tilgå spejlsiden, oprette en konto og indbetale penge. Alle betalinger blev stadig behandlet til den samme juridiske enhed, Bets Entertainment NV, på trods af brugen af forskellige domæner. Dette tyder stærkt på, at spejlsidene bevidst bruges til at opretholde adgang for begrænsede jurisdiktioner, samtidig med at den samme betalings- og driftsstruktur bevares.
Efter jeg havde rejst bekymringer, blev min konto lukket, og min anmodning om refusion blev afvist. Casinoet hævdede senere, at spillere fra min jurisdiktion ikke var tilladt, og forsøgte at påberåbe sig vilkår og betingelser, der fastslog, at det er spillerens ansvar at kende lokale spillelove. Samtidig beholdt de de indbetalinger, der blev accepteret via deres spejlside.
Efter min mening er dette yderst urimeligt af flere grunde:
Geoblokering anvendes selektivt kun på hoveddomænet, ikke på spejlwebsteder.
Der blev ikke vist nogen advarsler eller begrænsninger, før indbetalinger blev accepteret.
Indbetalinger fra spillere med begrænsede vilkår accepteres først og udfordres først senere, når der anmodes om en refusion.
At lukke en konto retfærdiggør ikke at beholde midler, der aldrig burde have været accepteret i første omgang.
For at sikre gennemsigtighed ledes Bets Entertainment NV af SMES NV, som ejes af Vivian Ersillia. Trods denne virksomhedsstruktur skubbes alt spillerrettet ansvar tilbage på brugeren, når der opstår et problem.
Jeg har indsendt en formel klage til 1Red for måneder siden og venter stadig på et meningsfuldt svar fra deres compliance- eller juridiske afdeling.
Jeg deler dette, så andre spillere – især dem i begrænsede jurisdiktioner – forstår, hvordan 1Red opererer via mirror-sider, og hvad de kan forvente, hvis der opstår en tvist. Hvis andre har oplevet lignende problemer med 1Red eller dets mirror-domæner, er I velkomne til at dele.
I’m posting this to warn others and to document an unresolved complaint against 1Red Casino.
I am a resident of the Netherlands. While 1Red claims it does not accept players from certain jurisdictions, this is only partially true. Their main website (1red.com) applies geo-blocking, but their mirror websites (such as 1red2.com) do not. Through these mirror sites, players from restricted countries can register, deposit, and play without any warning or restriction.
This is what happened in my case.
I was able to access the mirror site freely, create an account, and deposit funds. All payments were still processed to the same legal entity, Bets Entertainment N.V., despite the use of different domains. This strongly suggests that the mirror sites are deliberately used to maintain access for restricted jurisdictions while keeping the same payment and operational structure.
After I raised concerns, my account was closed and my refund request was denied. The casino later claimed that players from my jurisdiction are not allowed and tried to rely on Terms & Conditions stating that it is the player’s responsibility to know local gambling laws. At the same time, they kept the deposits that were accepted through their mirror site.
In my view, this is extremely unfair for several reasons:
Geo-blocking is selectively applied only on the main domain, not on mirror sites.
No warnings or restrictions were shown before deposits were accepted.
Deposits from restricted players are accepted first, and only challenged later when a refund is requested.
Closing an account does not justify keeping funds that should never have been accepted in the first place.
For transparency, Bets Entertainment N.V. is directed by SMES N.V., which is owned by Vivian Ersillia. Despite this corporate structure, all player-facing responsibility is pushed back onto the user once an issue arises.
I have submitted a formal complaint to 1Red montgs ago and am still waiting for a meaningful response from their compliance or legal department.
I’m sharing this so other players — especially those in restricted jurisdictions — understand how 1Red operates via mirror sites and what to expect if a dispute occurs. If anyone else has experienced similar issues with 1Red or its mirror domains, feel free to share.
Automatisk oversættelse:
