This casino used to operate under Curacao. At that time, I asked to block their entire casino group due to a bad gambling addiction. It was successful at that time. The year was 2022-2023 when I set the blocks. However, about a year ago, those old blocks were removed without any notice. I was able to use their Curacao-based casinos again, although before I couldn't even log in because of the blocks. Is there any reason to complain about this or can the promised blocks be removed just for that? Although it has indeed been said that I am blocked by their Curacao license.

T?m? kasino toimi ennen curacaon alla. T?ll?in pyysin est?m??n koko heid?n kasinoryhm?n pahan peliriippuvuuden takia. Se onnistuikin tuolloin. Vuosi oli 2022-2023, kun estot asetin. Noin vuosi sitten nuo vanhat estot kuitenkin poistuivat ilman mit??n ilmoitusta. Pystyin j?lleen k?ytt?m??n heid?n curacaon alaisia kasinoita, vaikka ennen en p??ssyt edes kirjautumaan estojen takia. Onko t?ss? aihetta valitukselle vai saako luvatut estot poistaa tuosta vain? Vaikka siis tosiaan on sanottu, ett? olen estetty heid?n curacaon lisenssill?.

Hello Mag7,

Every concern is worth raising a complaint because we can only retroactively determine whether it "was worth it" based on the process itself. This is a very good point, by the way, and in my opinion, it may partly depend on whether the block was associated with the license, such as when you sent your request to the license provider and were self-excluded at this level based on its interaction, or if it was your request that was forwarded to the casino. I'm just thinking aloud here; I can be entirely wrong, but I can somehow imagine casinos saying something similar...

This situation is, in my opinion, worth a look—definitely.

My colleagues will surely provide more details.

I asked to block their entire Curacao license. Later I went to ask again that I was blocked for the entire license. They replied that I was blocked for the entire license due to gambling addiction. This was in 2023, when the casino was still operating under Curacao. Something changed in 2024 and the old blocks were removed, without any notice. Before this I was not able to log in/deposit at their Curacao casinos.

I think they should have at least announced if they can no longer keep the blocks. I don't understand why they suddenly removed them and refuse to answer anything about it.

Pyysin est?m??n koko heid?n curacaon lisenssin. My?hemmin menin viel? kysym??n, ett? olenhan estetty koko lisenssille. He vastasivat, ett? olen estetty peliriippuvuuden takia koko lisenssill?. T?m? siis 2023 aikaan, kun kasino viel? toimi curacaon alla. Jotain muuttui 2024 ja vanhat estot poistettiin, ilman mit??n ilmoitusta. Ennen t?t? en pystynyt kirjautumaan/tallettamaan heid?n curacaon kasinoille.

Mielest?ni heid?n olisi ainakin kuulunut ilmoittaa, jos he eiv?t voi en?? pit?? estoja. En kyll? ymm?rr?, ett? miksi he ovat yht?kki? ne poistaneet eik? he suostu asiaan vastaamaan mit??n.

This was the conversation that took place when they were still under Curacao lisence. If they have told me this, can they all The sudden now allow me to use their sites again?

So, what should you do in a situation where a casino has promised to block a license, but has suddenly removed it and now says that it is not possible to block a license? Which of these is valid, what the casino is saying now or what was said before?

Eli miten toimia tilanteessa miss? kasino on luvannut estot lisenssille, mutta on ne yht?kki? poistanut ja nyt sanoo, ett? lisenssi? ei ole mahdollista est??? Kumpi n?ist? on validi, se mit? kasino nyt sanoo vai mit? ennen on sanottu?

Thank you very much for all the details.

I would certainly submit the complaint. For me, the dispute is no longer about whether the casino can do something or not. I believe we had this conversation before. Casinos can do anything but the question is what is responsible and acceptable.

Thus, I would go for the complaint. I agree with you; they should send you a note at least. We may both find out the industry works differently than the license requires.

I really don't understand these types of casino groups. They claim that there was no such discussion and on this basis refuse to hand over the discussion history, for example. Now they have also blocked me from all customer service at their Estonian and Curacao casinos.

I think it's extremely bad behavior from the casino that they can't admit their own mistakes, and that they're outright lying to achieve their own benefit.

En tosiaan ymm?rr? t?llaisia kasinoryhmi?. He v?itt?v?t, ett? mit??n t?llaista keskustelua ei ole ollut ja t?ll? perustein kielt?ytyv?t esimerkiksi luovuttamasta keskusteluhistoriaa. Nyt he lis?ksi estiv?t minut kaikkialta heid?n Viron ja curacaon kasinoiden asiakaspalvelusta.

Mielest?ni ??rimm?isen huonoa toimintaa kasinolta, ett? omia virheit? ei voida my?nt??, sek? suoranaisesti valehdellaan tavoittaakseen omaa etua.

They said there has never been such a conversation?!

Again, I'm at a loss for words.

If I may, always back up every communication you have at the casino regarding account closure. To me, this seems like the only way to overcome casinos' unwillingness to play fairly. It is a huge game changer once you can show that they are lying.

Could you please clarify whether this specific casino has self-excluded you or if it has only restricted your overall access to support? I hope I'm wrong here.

Yes they did, the most annoying part is that i clearly remember that i have asked to block their curacao lisence. At that time they said it is possible to do due my addiction. Now they say it is not possible to do and they dont offer that. I have been stupid as i have trusted the fact that this lisence block wouldnt go away like that and at least they wouldnt lie regarding the matter later on. I dont lie regarding this, at that time i blocked also few other curacao lisenced. As this conversation clearly shows, this was one of those lisences that set the block.

I have been really trusting towards casinos. Now i definitely know better for sure. They blocked my contacts first under Curacao, later they also did it under their Estonian lisence. Also they have earlier closed my account under Curacao when i contacted their Estonian lisence support. Owner is clearly The same, they just play with different lisences. We can all guess why all of their sites isnt under Estonian, when they clearly would have that opportunity...

Well, the way I see it, it was possible to self-exclude from certain license providers—one of the 4 former sublicenses—by submitting an official request through that license, not the casino. I believed we were discussing this specific situation. However, if you approach just the casino and they come up with their own way of excluding you, guess within its group, which has a specific license? It is something else, and we are getting back to the point of the casino's terms and, sadly, the screenshots.

I understand your point; it appears that only the license has changed, and I comprehend that.

However, self-exclusion on the operator/casino level, from the player perspective, has very little to do with specific licenses and therefore should be functioning regardless.

Thus, I believe it is stupid to reopen accounts like this without any warning or questions and keep lying about previous discussions.

Well if go to casinos support and ask can i have their whole lisence blocked due my addiction. They say that they agree to this and blocked me entirely from every site under lisence. Later i go to one of their curacao sites to ask that and they confirmed that i'm blocked from the whole lisence. And like i said i even couldnt log in on their curacao casinos with bank details earlier. All this changed last year and all the old blocks had gone away.

They would definitely send me the conversations, If they have done everything correctly. Like why wouldnt they? Of course they clearly can change their responsibility matters, like they clearly have done. However this is just to benefit from addicts. They also could easily set the blocks, like they have done so 2022-2023.

And yes, every Curacao license I've had blocked has been blocked through the casino's customer service. So they've always been able to put the blocks in place, either by being able to set them themselves or by forwarding the matter.

Ja kyll?, jokaisen curacaon lisenssin mink? olen saanut estetty?, on esto tapahtunut kyseisen lisenssin kasinon asiakaspalvelun kautta. Eli he ovat joka kerta saaneet laitettua estot voimaan, joko pystym?ll? asettamaan ne itse tai siirt?m??n asiaa eteenp?in.

The latest description is very precise and I see it the same way. Why wouldn't the casino provide the chats if everything was done correctly...

I just sent this information to our Data Team expert Jozef. I'm interested in his opinion on this.

Thank you.

When i clearly have this screenshot of this conversation, it has happened and i'm sure they have it stored as this has took place 2023.

It is odd for them to say that i dont have any conversation history with this casino, and it is clearly seen they are totally lying about that.

Jozef and I agreed that associating self-exclusion with the Cura?ao license is nonsensical. It has no meaning aside from misleading the player completely.

Self-exclusion works basically on those levels:

1) Single-operator level: Typically, when self-excluding in an online casino, the self-exclusion does not extend to other operators. (This creates a problem: self-excluded players can freely access and play at other casino websites, bringing the overall effectiveness of such self-exclusion schemes into question.)

2) Nationwide/license-wide level: Some countries and online gambling regulators, such as the UK, Sweden, or the Netherlands, operate wider self-exclusion schemes, which require their licensees (operators) to be part of nationwide (license-wide) self-exclusion schemes. These allow players to self-exclude from all casinos licensed in a specific country or by a specific regulator at once, creating a better level of protection.

In hand with that, once the account is self-excluded due to gambling addiction, no license changes should affect it. That's, pardon my French, bullshit.

If the casino is now saying that they can't exclude you on "license level," that's correct, yet the account should have never been reopened like this in the first place because there has never been a working tool to "exclude by license"...

So why then some curacao casinogroups sets blocks If you ask so? As did them also 2022.

For example i still have blocks for every casino under dama NV, Versus odds bv. I can make account just normal but they close it immediately.

And so did this group also, i couldnt log in their sites with My bank id with years 2022-2023. They changed their policy 2024 and no longer offers that clearly.

Dama NV is even so exemplary that they will also block you with an Estonian license if you have requested a block with their Curacao license. So for example, I cannot use any of the dama NV owner's casinos. Even though I have requested a block for the license, only one! Through their subordinate casino.

Dama NV on viel?p? niin esimerkillinen, ett? he est?v?t sinut my?s Viron lisenssill?, jos olet pyyt?nyt estoa heid?n curacaon lisenssill?. Eli esimerkiksi en pysty k?ytt?m??n yht?k??n dama NV omistajan kasinoa. Vaikka olen pyyt?nyt estoa lisenssille, vain yhden! heid?n alaisen kasinon kautta.

What is mostly my point here, is that even lisence terms allows you to do something do you always have to do exactly like that? We all know that many curacao casinogroups could easily set blocks for their management casinos. But when curacao lisence allows them to not to do that, most decides to take benefit from this.

When we talk sites that has same support, same management, same owner. Most cases there isnt any valid reason why they wouldnt set blocks If it is asked. Just because they are allowed to do so, of course they want to benefit from that.

Like i said for example dama NV has set the blocks for every casinos they have, both Estonian and curacao lisence. Even when i only asked this from one casino under their curacao lisence. They operate with totally independent sites, with different support etc. That is an example that you dont always have to do everything what your lisence terms allows you to do. As a owner of casinos, you can always choose the responsible way to act.