A self-excluded player from Ireland had opened a new account with the casino in violation of their terms and conditions. He accused the casino of breaching their terms as he had been able to register a new account after his previous account was closed due to his gambling addiction. He was then asking for a full refund of his latest deposits. Despite providing the casino with evidence of his previous self-exclusion and highlighting the lack of effective measures to prevent him from re-registering, the casino had refused to issue a refund. The casino had argued that the player had used a different email address to open the new account and had not completed the verification process. We had suggested that the casino should enhance its protection for problem gamblers and consider issuing a refund, but the casino maintained its stance. The complaint was closed as unresolved.
Samoisklju?en igra? iz Irske otvorio je novi nalog u kazinu kr?e?i njihove uslove i odredbe. Optu?io je kazino da je prekr?io njihove uslove jer je mogao da registruje novi nalog nakon ?to mu je prethodni nalog zatvoren zbog zavisnosti od kockanja. Zatim je tra?io potpuni povra?aj svojih poslednjih depozita. Uprkos tome ?to je kazinu pru?io dokaz o njegovom prethodnom samoisklju?enju i istakao nedostatak efikasnih mera koje bi ga spre?ile da se ponovo registruje, kazino je odbio da izda povra?aj novca. Kazino je tvrdio da je igra? koristio drugu adresu e-po?te za otvaranje novog naloga i da nije zavr?io proces verifikacije. Predlo?ili smo da kazino treba da pobolj?a svoju za?titu za problemati?ne kockare i razmotri mogu?nost povra?aja novca, ali je kazino ostao pri svom stavu. ?alba je zaklju?ena kao nere?ena.
Automatski prevedeno:
