Self Exclusion from online casino - useful players tool or mission impossible?

[ValDes]

Hello my fellow forum members,

 

Wanted to ask that question long time ago, but always postponing till now. Recently, I could see more and more new complaints submitted via AskGamblers Complaints Service concerning different self-exclusion issues and now I believe the right time to ask you has come. 

 

Please, feel free to share your own observations regarding the self-exclusion process offered by online casinos and/or licensing authorities you have used so far. How do you like it or not? Do you think it is really working or  not? Is it really useful players tool and just mission impossible to achieve? Anything you would like to say about self-exclusion... Now is the time.  

[helenakp]

I am sooo irresponsible when it comes to self exclusion!! From all this time i have closed only 2 accounts and the reason was not given bonus.

I have never self excluded in any casino,although when i think how much i spend this year,i think i am going to faint. I guess I needed to do that,but now its too late,but will keep that in mind,the next time when my e-wallet will have real,nice amount of money.

[Adebisi213]

My two cents... I think self-exclusion is pointless really. Unless there is one major player database used by all online casinos, it won't do much to stop a gambling addict. There are probably more than 1,000 online casinos out there. So let's say a player excludes himself from playing, he can just as easily sign up to a different casino and play the same games as the casino where he requested self-exclusion.

 

I think there should be more measures taken in order for it to really have an effect. If I self-exclude at a brick and mortar casino here, I will be refused entry from all casinos. There is no way this applies to the online gaming environment under the current settings.

[ValDes]

My two cents... I think self-exclusion is pointless really. Unless there is one major player database used by all online casinos, it won't do much to stop a gambling addict. There are probably more than 1,000 online casinos out there. So let's say a player excludes himself from playing, he can just as easily sign up to a different casino and play the same games as the casino where he requested self-exclusion.

 

I think there should be more measures taken in order for it to really have an effect. If I self-exclude at a brick and mortar casino here, I will be refused entry from all casinos. There is no way this applies to the online gaming environment under the current settings.

 

Well, not really as recently some licensing authorities have implemented /finally/ the option for players to request self-exclusion from all brands licensed by that authority. Check here for more information - http://www.mga.org.mt/wp-content/uploads/SELF-BARRING-REQUEST.pdf

 

And I sincerely believe this is a very good start to put the self-exclusion matter into some decent control and meaning after all. 

[Adebisi213]

I'm not sure if that form applies to online casinos Valdes. I think it's just restricted to land-based casinos in Malta. I haven't came across it before myself at any LGA licensed online casino linking to the form.

 

It does state this:

I     "I understand that the Authority, assisted by all concerned parties, shall implement means to restrict my entrance

into all licensed land-based gaming premises but it is my responsibility,"

[ValDes]

Hmm, yes, I see your point... Although I was advised this form could be used for online exclusion too...

 

Check this out - http://www.mga.org.mt/wp-content/uploads/Malta-Gaming-Authority-Charter.pdf

 

And pay attention to this part in particular - http://prntscr.com/7yht09

 

One would say that MGA should require such service...

[luckyloser]

My opinion is that there should be a database. Or if there are mutiple casinos under one liscense they should have software in place to prevent players from opening new accounts with sites that are connected. I have heard countless stories about players who dont get paid because of this.

 

I myself has self excluded from a few. Sometimes just because of very frustrating poor runs, but also when i have gotten carried away after big wins and started to gamble over my head.

And if someone really wants to quit gambling forever its simply impsossible to self exclude from all casinos as there are always new ones opening and problem players might sign up.

 

So i think the MGA,UKGC and so on shoud implement a database that all casinos lisensed in their juristicion should crosscheck every player signing up. This shouldent be to hard to implement. Just have a server that all casinos have access to then when someone chooses to self exclude they get flagged at all casinos. 

 

And also different casinos seams to handle this matter differently. Most reputable and bigger companies seams to be very serious on the matter of self exclusion. I closed my account at mr smith and i stated gambling problem as a reason because i blew allot of money after a huge win.

 

Then all of the sudden betsson and casinoeuro also closed my accounts. But they paid my winnings and told me due to my self exclusion i was not able to play there anymore ever. IMO they made the right decition.

 

As i myself also have made a complaint due to this matter on behalf of myself and my partner. One witch got resolved and the other one didd not. I see that some casinos take advatage of this. If you lose they take your money and if you win they refund the deposit and withhold your winnings.

 

I see that the Norwegian lottery comission has come forth with a reveiw on the matter of a Norwegian gaming lisence and they stated that if they where to allow online casinos under a Norwegian lisence there has to be implemented a database that players can request permanent exclusions,cooling of periods and even globally added deposit limits.. IMO this is how it should be done.

[Adebisi213]

Hmm, yes, I see your point... Although I was advised this form could be used for online exclusion too...

 

Check this out - http://www.mga.org.mt/wp-content/uploads/Malta-Gaming-Authority-Charter.pdf

 

And pay attention to this part in particular - http://prntscr.com/7yht09

 

One would say that MGA should require such service...

 

Absolutely! It would be a major step forward. The way I see it now, the self-exlusion gets abused by both online casinos and players. I've read enough stories of players and casinos using self-exclusion to their advantage in some cases.

 

It's a very serious matter that deserves much more attention in my opinion.

 

My opinion is that there should be a database. Or if there are mutiple casinos under one liscense they should have software in place to prevent players from opening new accounts with sites that are connected. I have heard countless stories about players who dont get paid because of this.

 

I myself has self excluded from a few. Sometimes just because of very frustrating poor runs, but also when i have gotten carried away after big wins and started to gamble over my head.

And if someone really wants to quit gambling forever its simply impsossible to self exclude from all casinos as there are always new ones opening and problem players might sign up.

 

So i think the MGA,UKGC and so on shoud implement a database that all casinos lisensed in their juristicion should crosscheck every player signing up. This shouldent be to hard to implement. Just have a server that all casinos have access to then when someone chooses to self exclude they get flagged at all casinos. 

 

And also different casinos seams to handle this matter differently. Most reputable and bigger companies seams to be very serious on the matter of self exclusion. I closed my account at mr smith and i stated gambling problem as a reason because i blew allot of money after a huge win.

 

Then all of the sudden betsson and casinoeuro also closed my accounts. But they paid my winnings and told me due to my self exclusion i was not able to play there anymore ever. IMO they made the right decition.

 

As i myself also have made a complaint due to this matter on behalf of myself and my partner. One witch got resolved and the other one didd not. I see that some casinos take advatage of this. If you lose they take your money and if you win they refund the deposit and withhold your winnings.

 

I see that the Norwegian lottery comission has come forth with a reveiw on the matter of a Norwegian gaming lisence and they stated that if they where to allow online casinos under a Norwegian lisence there has to be implemented a database that players can request permanent exclusions,cooling of periods and even globally added deposit limits.. IMO this is how it should be done.

 

That's how the Dutch gaming commission plans to regulate things. They will only allow a set number of casinos to operate within their license and each player will be submitted to a database to protect them against gambling addiction. It's the only right way to handle it.

[ValDes]

Indeed, that's a really serious matter and a problem as well which modern online gaming industry is still struggling to cope with in my humble opinion. 

 

We had a serious amount of complaints concerning Self-Exclusion /SE/ matters in the last year and so and must admit most of them were really hard to judge. No matter what the outcome of such complaint would be, one of the parties involved into the complaints process claim it was a "win-win" situation for the opposite one and a "lose-lose" situation for themselves. But the real mess comes when there are more operators involved and where all of them are operating under the same license. Like the notorious Every Matrix for example and their MGA license C44411 which shelters a long list of online brands like Next Casino and its sister Casino Luck, Casino Cruise, Casino Floor, PlayHippo, NoxWin, etc etc... A players requested SE at one of these brands should NOT BE ALLOWED to play at any of the other brands sharing the same license, or at least that should be the common sense and logic. Unfortunately, this is not the case and we had at least a dozen of complaints against these brands where players claimed their winnings to be refunded due to their active SE with one and more of these brands. It is also weird how casinos react in different situations - when players winnings were void for example and when refusing players refund. 

 

I will dig out some of the most interesting cases concerning SE and post it here, Guess it would very interesting for all of you to know what to expect in such situation.  

[Adebisi213]

I'm just glad I'm not in your shoes Valdes or that of the AskGamblers mediators team. These situations are tricky and hard to judge upon when there are players deliberately targeting online casinos where they were self-excluded, while at the same time some online casinos will happily take your money until you make the "mistake" of ending up winning.

 

Then they will grab an excerpt of their terms and tell you you're not eligible to receive your winnings due to self exclusion only to have your deposits returned. Regarding the EveryMatrix case I think the platform and connected casinos simply made major mistakes there and tons of players have felt the consequences.

 

They should clearly state during the self exclusion process that it means they will be refused entry to all other Every Matrix casinos, including mentioning them one-by-one so there can be no mistake about it. Now it's almost like legal robbery in my opinion refusing players their winnings when they didn't even know they were self-excluded from another Every Matrix casino.

 

So that situation probably angered a lot of players who were self excluded and played at a different Every Matrix casino and ended up losing, and eventually found out that they never had a chance to "win" since they wouldn't be paid out.

 

Not sure how they all ended up handling it as I haven't digged around the complaint section recently, but I hope they found the most honest resolution.

[ValDes]

Yeah, and speaking of it...

 

These are the new complaints concerning SE, all of them from the last couple of days only...

 

Norskespill Casino - Ignore my gambling problem

 

Casino Floor - Ignored my gambling problem

 

Buck and Butler Casino - Ignored my gambling problem

 

Casino Estrella - Self-excluded in their sister casino, but opened…

[Adebisi213]

They are all from the same player it seems. The way I see it the casinos can't have it both ways, if they can confiscate winnings because someone who self-excluded won at a particular EveryMatrix casino, then they should be prepared to pay up all the losers who never had a chance on winning in the first place as well whenever that rule was in effect.

[ValDes]

Actually the aforementioned complaints are posted by two different users, however one of them claims a refund from three different casinos sharing the same EveryMatrix Maltese license - Norskespill, Buck and Bultler and Casino Floor.  

[Adebisi213]

Ooh sorry, think I missed the last one then. Just read a bit and came across this statement from Casino Estrella rep: "We are sympathetic with your situation and we usually like to solve these issues in benefit of the players, but in this case we really have no basis to ask CasinoEstrella for a refund of your deposit."

 

Yeh, right! If anything I keep seeing these issues getting solved in favor of the casinos like 9 out of 10 times. Must be a very profitable operation, if a player wins you confiscate his money and tell him that he self-excluded and return his deposit. And if a player loses, then of course the casino won't do the same let alone a proactive stance.

[ValDes]

Yes and that is the main reason why I opened this particular topic - I would to hear players opinion about it.

[Adebisi213]

I know Valdes, but why do I not see any casino reps in this thread to give their two cents about this topic? Would love to see some of them sharing their views. I don't even see how they can justify such win-win situations where a player simply has no chance at all.

[MarkoD]

I think there is some sort of hypocrisy in the self-exclusion concept.

I'm not saying it is totally useless, but it is far from being THE solution to prevent gambling for addicted players.

Do I have a solution to propose instead? No, I don't.

I just want to point out that we should not depend on laws or commissions to protect us from addictions.

Like it or not we are the main "protectors" (or "destroyers") of ourselves.

[ValDes]

I think there is some sort of hypocrisy in the self-exclusion concept.

I'm not saying it is totally useless, but it is far from being THE solution to prevent gambling for addicted players.

Do I have a solution to propose instead? No, I don't.

I just want to point out that we should not depend on laws or commissions to protect us from addictions.

Like it or not we are the main "protectors" (or "destroyers") of ourselves.

 

Couldn't agree more!