Kontoen blev lukket af mig i 2020 under jeg tror var selvudelukkelse i 5 år.
Jeg forsøgte at logge på lørdag, og kontoen blev suspenderet og blev bedt om at kontakte support. De bekræftede, at kontoen var lukket, men hævdede ikke under SE, hvilket jeg bestrider.
Deres agent sagde, at jeg har et SE med en af Entain Sister-webstederne, og at jeg burde åbne en ny konto hos Ladbrokes. Den SE, jeg anvendte på søsterwebstedet, skulle have været anvendt på hele Entain Groups' fulde liste over firmaer. I mangel af det, det faktum, at deres agent ved, at jeg er SE, bør de ikke tillade og fremme åbning af en ny konto. De gjorde dette, og dette er ikke spillerbeskyttelse, da de ved at kende til sårbarheder ikke pålagde nogen begrænsninger på den nye konto.
Dette gav en SE-kunde mulighed for hensynsløst at indbetale omkring £750 i en periode på 2 timer. Min partner, som er meget opmærksom på min SE og tidligere spilleafhængighed, opdagede dette den følgende morgen.
En klage blev indgivet til Ladbrokes og bevismateriale til støtte for 3 punkter, der blev rejst til dem:
Som en kendt SE-kunde fra et websted under Entain-gruppen (så oplysningerne var tilgængelige på deres system, bekræftede de bevidst, at jeg skulle åbne en ny konto på deres Ladbrokes-side.
Da jeg var SE og det var kendt for dem, da jeg gennemførte den handling sidste år, burde dette være blevet anvendt af dem på tværs af alle grupper under dem. De ejes af samme koncern under samme licens. Det gjorde de ikke
I 2020 kontaktede BETDAQ mig med besked om, at et problem havde forårsaget, at indbetalingsgrænsefunktionen ikke fungerede, og jeg fik som sådan lov til at indbetale mere, end jeg burde have været i stand til. De refunderede dette som betaling til mig. Jeg fremhævede mine bekymringer om mine spillevaner, og at jeg var ude af kontrol og afhængig. Dette fik dem til at lukke min konto, hvilket er forståeligt. Da de på det tidspunkt var en del af Ladbrokes-gruppen, føler jeg igen, at kontolukningen på det tidspunkt skulle have været anvendt på tværs af deres gruppe.
Jeg spurgte, da BETDAQ lukkede kontoen, at de specifikt begrænsede mit indskudsniveau på tværs af mærkerne under Entain Group. Så effektivt i stedet for at hvert websted har en individuel grænse, ville det være kumulativt. Jeg blev informeret om, at dette blev sendt til deres overholdelsesteam, men der blev ikke givet noget svar.
Ladbrokes burde ikke have tilladt registrering af en konto, når den var klar over, at en sårbar kunde er SE hos et brand under koncernen. Deres verifikationsproces burde have bekræftet, at en udelukkelse var på plads og afvist dette.
Ud over dette, da jeg SE sidste år på et søstersted, skulle dette have været anvendt i hele gruppen og forhindret yderligere aflejringer siden da, da de var opmærksomme på sårbarheder.
Ud over dette, da BETDAQ var opmærksomme på sårbarheder og som sådan besluttede at lukke min konto, skulle dette have været anvendt i hele gruppen og forhindret yderligere indbetalinger siden da.
Disse punkter blev stillet til Ladbrokes-teamet, som specifikt bekræftede, at de ville være nødt til at undersøge især spørgsmålet om selvudelukkelse. Som svar svarede Ladbrokes blot ved at oplyse, at de havde rapporteret mig til GamProtect og lukket alle konti under Entain Group. Jeg er enig i denne handling. De refererer ikke til andre punkter, der er stillet til dem omkring selvudelukkelse og foreslår, at jeg i lyset af dette skulle åbne en ny konto. De nægtede overhovedet at reagere på selvudelukkelsespunkter.
Spillerbeskyttelsesteamet, der bekræftede dette, har nægtet at svare på mit e-mail-svar, som fortæller, at de ikke har undersøgt, overvejet eller reageret på mine SE-punkter. Dette er deres svar, som ikke er acceptabelt.
De arbejder ikke på linje med sikrere spil og beskyttelse af sårbare spillere og undgår tydeligvis et overbevisende punkt, da de ikke kan forsvare deres handlinger. Deres klagesvar og afvisning af at behandle punkter er en åbenlys indrømmelse af, at deres handlinger er i strid med reglerne.
Deres handling med at rapportere mig til GamProtect er en handling for at dække sig selv lige så meget, som den er for at dække mig, dette er en handling, der burde have været påtvunget i 2020 og 2023 i det mindste.
Det omstridte beløb er det, der blev indsat efter åbningen af kontoen i denne uge. Jeg kan anmode om tilbagebetaling af indbetalinger foretaget efter kontolukningen hos BETDAQ i 2020 og SE i 2023, dette ville være en tilbagebetaling af alle indbetalinger foretaget til Entain Group efter lukningsbegivenheden(erne), og for dette har jeg anmodet om en liste over indbetalinger, som jeg har foretaget til hver operatør, så jeg kan finde det samlede beløb, der er foretaget til dem.
Hvis en spiller omgår en proces for at få en konto, og det senere bliver opdaget, at dette er tilfældet, vil kasinoet suspendere kontoen og midlerne fra den spiller. Dette vil sandsynligvis omfatte, at hvis de har registreret sig hos en operatør, og de har fundet ud af at være selvudelukkede på et søstersted, ville de have omgået processen og overtrådt reglerne. I dette eksempel har Ladbrokes villigt brudt reglerne og derefter suspenderet mig efter at have modtaget indskud, hvilket jeg vil sige er under falske forudsætninger.
Account was closed by me in 2020 under i believe was self exclusion for 5 years.
I tried to login on Saturday and account was suspended and advised to contact support. They confirmed account was closed but claimed not under SE which i dispute.
Their agent stated that i do have a SE with one of the Entain Sister sites and that i should open a new account with Ladbrokes. The SE i applied on the sister site should have been applied across the Entain Groups full list on firms. In the absence of that, the fact their agent knows i'm SE, they should not then be allowing and promoting opening of a new account. They did this and this is not player protection as in knowing of vulnerabilities they imposed no restrictions on the new account.
This allowed a SE customer to recklessly deposit around £750 in a period of 2 hours. My partner who is heavily aware of my SE and previous gambling addictions discovered this the following morning.
A complaint was put to Ladbrokes and evidence to support 3 points raised to them:
As a known SE customer from a site under the Entain Group (so the info was available on their system, the willfully confirm i would need to open a new account on their Ladbrokes site.
As i was SE and it was known to them, when i completed that action last year this should have been applied by them across all groups under them. They are owned by the same group under the same license. They did not do this
In 2020 BETDAQ contacted me advising an issue had caused the deposit limit function to not work and i was as such allowed to deposit more than i should have been able to. They refunded this as payment to me. I highlighted my concerns about my gambling habits and that i was out of control and addicted. This prompted them to close my account which is understandable. As at the time they were part of the Ladbrokes group i feel again that the account closure should have been at that point applied across their group.
i asked at the time BETDAQ closed the account that they specifically limit my deposit level across the brands under the Entain Group. So effectively rather than each site having an individual limit it would be cumulative. I was advised that this was put to their compliance team but no response was made.
Ladbrokes should not have allowed registration of an account when aware a vulnerable customer is SE at a brand under the group. Their verification process should have confirmed that an exclusion was in place and rejected this.
Further to this when i SE last year at a sister site, this should have been applied group wide and prevented any further deposits since then as they were aware of vulnerabilities.
Further to this when BETDAQ were aware of vulnerabilities and as such decided to close my account, this should have been applied group wide and prevented any further deposits since then.
These points were put to the Ladbrokes team who specifically confirmed that they would need to investigate particularly around the self exclusion issue. In response Ladbrokes simply responded by stating that they had reported me to GamProtect and closed all accounts under Entain Group. I agree with this action. They make no reference to any other points put to them around self exclusion and suggesting that in light of this i should open a new account. They refused to respond at all to any self exlclusion points.
The Player Protection team who confirmed this have refused to respond to my email response which advises they have not investigated, considered or responded to my SE points. This is their response which is not acceptable.
They are not operating inline with safer gambling and protection of vulnerable players and are clearly avoiding a compelling point as they cannot defend their actions. Their complaint response and refusal to deal with points is an obvious admission that their actions are against regulations.
Their action of reporting me to GamProtect is an action to cover themself as much as it is to cover me, this is an action that should have been imposed in 2020 and 2023 at least.
The disputed amount is what was deposited after opening the account this week. I may seek a refund of deposits made after the account closure with BETDAQ in 2020, and SE in 2023, this would be a refund of all deposits made to Entain Group after the closure event (s) and for this i have requested a list of deposits that i have made to each operator so i can find the total amount made to them.
If a player circumvents any process to obtain an account and it is later found out this is the case, the casino would suspend the account and funds from that player. This would likely include that if they have registered with an operator and they have found to be self excluded at a sister site, they would have circumvented the process and breached the rules. In this example Ladbrokes have willingly broken the rules and then suspended me after obtaining deposits which i would say is under false pretences.
Deaktiver din AdBlock