Kære BetBeast Casino,
Tak for din e-mail.
Jeg må informere jer om, at når en spiller anmoder om selvudelukkelse, skal deres konto forblive lukket permanent uden mulighed for genåbning. Den 23/12 anmodede spilleren om lukning af sin konto på grund af spilleproblemer og modtog endda bekræftelse fra jeres support på, at kontoen var blevet lukket permanent - som den burde have været.
Uanset eventuelle udtalelser, beskeder eller påstande, som spilleren måtte have fremsat bagefter, burde kontoen aldrig have været genåbnet. I dette tilfælde lykkedes det dog spilleren at udelukke sig selv og efterfølgende genåbne sin konto fire gange inden for et par uger.
Dette repræsenterer et alvorligt brud på standarderne for ansvarligt spil og modsiger vores forventninger til et sikkert spillemiljø.
Derudover nævnte du, at du fra nu af vil bede spillere om at installere BetBlocker, og at du ikke vil blive holdt ansvarlig for eventuelle tab, hvis de ikke gør det.
Selvom det er positivt at se en sådan foranstaltning blive indarbejdet i jeres procedurer for ansvarligt spil, skal I være opmærksomme på, at det er casinoets egen grundlæggende pligt at beskytte spillere, der har anmodet om selvudelukkelse, i stedet for at stole på eksterne programmer.
Endelig anførte du også, at du kun ville fortsætte med en refusion i denne klage, hvis spilleren installerer BetBlocker. Som nævnt ovenfor er BetBlocker faktisk et nyttigt værktøj for spillere, der kæmper med spilleproblemer, og vi anbefaler det også hos Casino Guru. Det er dog ikke rimeligt at betinge løsningen af denne klage af, at spilleren installerer tredjepartssoftware.
Derfor er spilleren berettiget til refusion af alle indbetalinger foretaget efter den første kontolukning på grund af problematisk spil, minus eventuelle udbetalinger.
Dear BetBeast Casino,
Thank you for your email.
I must inform you that once a player requests self-exclusion, their account must remain closed permanently, without any possibility of being reopened. On 23/12, the player requested the closure of his account due to gambling problem and even received confirmation from your support that the account had been permanently closed - as it should have been.
Regardless of any statements, messages, or claims the player may have made afterward, the account should never have been reopened. In this case, however, the player managed to self-exclude and subsequently reopen his account four times within a few weeks.
This represents a serious breach of responsible gambling standards and contradicts our expectations regarding a safe gambling environment.
Additionally, you mentioned that from now on you will request players to install BetBlocker and that you will not be held responsible for any potential losses if they fail to do so.
While it is positive to see such a measure being incorporated into your responsible gambling procedures, please note that it is the casino’s own fundamental duty to protect players who have requested self-exclusion, rather than relying on external programs.
Finally, you also stated that you would only proceed with a refund in this complaint if the player installs BetBlocker. As mentioned above, BetBlocker is indeed a helpful tool for players struggling with gambling problems, and we at Casino Guru also recommend it. However, it is not reasonable to condition the resolution of this complaint on the player installing third-party software.
Therefore, the player is eligible for a refund of all deposits made after the first account closure due to problematic gambling, minus any withdrawals.
Automatisk oversættelse: