Kære LuckyMax Casino,
Tak for den angivne forklaring. Jeg vil gerne nævne, at selvudelukkelse på grund af et spilleproblem er et meget alvorligt problem, fordi spillerne ofte mister kontrollen over deres handlinger og ikke tænker rationelt. At informere casinoet om et potentielt spilleproblem er en vigtig del af selvudelukkelsesprocessen, og vi hos Casino.Guru mener, at hvis en spiller har et spilleproblem og informerer casinoet om det, skal deres konto lukkes permanent uden mulighed for at åbning (bortset fra visse situationer som når en lang nok selvudelukkelsesperiode allerede er gået - vi taler om år) og også en relevant genåbningsproces, som inkluderer en tilstrækkelig afkølingsperiode (ikke en dag, men mindst en uge, ideelt set to) og også kommunikation med spilleren i denne afkølingsperiode for at verificere, om anmodningen blev fremsat med sunde tanker og ikke kun var en midlertidig fejl.
I dette tilfælde var tidsrammen for selvekskluderingsprocessen for lang (13,4 - 2,6). Vi anbefaler at forbedre hele processen. Selvudelukkelsen på grund af ludomani bør gennemføres inden for et par dage. I dette tilfælde var det over en måned. Derfor bør spilleren være berettiget til at få refunderet deres indskud fra 18.4. indtil dagen for kontolukningen.
Jeg vil gerne spørge dig, om vi har forstået situationen korrekt, eller om der er andre oplysninger om, hvorfor spilleren med et spilproblem fik lov til at genåbne sin konto og spille så nemt.
Dear LuckyMax Casino,
Thank you for the provided explanation. I would like to mention that self-exclusion due to a gambling problem is a very serious issue because the players often lose control over their actions and are not thinking rationally. Informing the casino about a potential gambling problem is an important part of the self-exclusion process and we at Casino.Guru believe that if a player has a gambling problem and informs the casino about it, their account should be permanently closed without the possibility of opening (except for certain situations like when a long enough self-exclusion period has already passed - we are talking about years) and also a relevant reopening process, which includes a sufficient cool off period (not a day but at least a week, ideally two) and also communication with the player during this cool-off period for verifying if the request was made in sound mind and wasn't just a temporary failure.
In this case, the self-exclusion process timeframe was too long (13.4 - 2.6). We recommend improving the whole process. The self-exclusion due to gambling addiction should be carried out within a couple of days. In this case, it was over a month. Therefore, the player should be entitled to get a refund of their deposits from 18.4. until the day of the account closure.
I would like to ask you if we understood the situation correctly or if there is any other information as to why was the player with a gambling problem allowed to reopen his account and play so easily.
Automatisk oversættelse: