CryptoCasino.com - Ο λογαριασμός του παίκτη άνοιξε ξανά με λανθασμένο τρόπο.

I am filing this complaint because CryptoCasino violated responsible gaming rules regarding permanent self-exclusion.

I requested the permanent blocking of my account on November 21, 2025, and I requested it again on November 25, 2025, clearly stating that I wanted a permanent block with no possibility of unblocking.

On November 25, 2025, CryptoCasino support confirmed in writing that the account had been successfully closed, as per my request.

Subsequently, during the month of December, the account was reopened by the casino after a request, even though it was a confirmed permanent self-exclusion.

Allowing the reopening of an account closed by permanent self-exclusion contradicts the basic principles of responsible gambling, as such exclusions should not be reversed, or at the very least should require strict controls and cooling-off periods, which were not applied.

After the reopening, I was able to play again and suffered financial losses, the exact amount of which I cannot determine, but which are recorded in the account history.

I request the return of the losses suffered after the improper reopening of the account, as well as the acknowledgment of the breach by the casino.

Attached are emails that prove the request for permanent self-exclusion and the confirmation of the closure by CryptoCasino.

Presento esta reclamación porque CryptoCasino incumplió las normas de juego responsable en relación con una autoexclusión permanente.

Solicité el bloqueo permanente de mi cuenta el 21 de noviembre de 2025, y volví a solicitarlo el 25 de noviembre de 2025, indicando claramente que deseaba un bloqueo para siempre y sin posibilidad de desbloqueo.

El 25 de noviembre de 2025, el soporte de CryptoCasino confirmó por escrito que la cuenta había sido cerrada con éxito, conforme a mi solicitud.

Posteriormente, durante el mes de diciembre, la cuenta fue reabierta por el casino tras una solicitud, a pesar de que se trataba de una autoexclusión permanente ya confirmada.

Permitir la reapertura de una cuenta cerrada por autoexclusión permanente contradice los principios básicos de juego responsable, ya que dichas exclusiones no deberían revertirse, o como mínimo deberían requerir estrictos controles y periodos de enfriamiento, los cuales no se aplicaron.

Tras la reapertura, pude volver a jugar y sufrí pérdidas económicas, cuyo importe exacto no puedo determinar, pero que constan en el historial de la cuenta.

Solicito la devolución de las pérdidas sufridas tras la reapertura indebida de la cuenta, así como el reconocimiento del incumplimiento por parte del casino.

Adjunto correos electrónicos que prueban la solicitud de autoexclusión permanente y la confirmación del cierre por parte de CryptoCasino.

Important notice:

Casino Guru will never ask for payments or access to your accounts to complete KYC. If someone claims to be from Casino Guru and does that, do not share any information.

We only contact players through this official complaint thread or via @casino.guru e-mail addresses. Always check the sender’s domain and verify your complaint resolver’s e-mail address by clicking on their avatar visible inside the official complaint thread.

If anything seems suspicious, contact us directly.

Stay safe.

Dear Alejandr8888,

Thank you very much for submitting your complaint. I’m very sorry to hear about your negative experience.

First, I’d like to clarify the difference between closing an account and self-exclusion:

• Closing an account is simple and has almost no long-term impact. The player can reopen the account at any time, and the casino has no obligations toward the player.
• Self-exclusion, however, is more serious. If a player successfully requests self-exclusion, the casino agrees not to reopen the account, or only under very specific circumstances (after the cooling-off period, and not for players with a gambling problem).

According to the Responsible Gambling policy:

"If you are diagnosed with a gambling addiction or wish to stay away from gambling for another reason, we want to assist you in avoiding anything that may harm you. ‘Self-Exclusion’ means that you voluntarily exclude yourself from all gambling services. This exclusion cannot be undone for a set period of time. If you wish to self-exclude from gambling, please message our Support and specify a time span between 6 months and 5 years. They will also explain the next steps and what is required from you."

Please keep in mind that self-exclusion is permanent for the selected period and cannot be undone for your protection.

To help us understand your situation better, could you please clarify:

• Did you clearly inform the casino about your gambling problem?
• Did you explicitly state that you wanted a permanent self-exclusion after the temporary cooling-off period expired?
• Did you receive any notifications or warnings from CryptoCasino during the period when your account was reopened?

Thank you very much in advance for your reply.

Best regards,

Petra

Thank you for your response and for the detailed explanation.

Below, I clarify the points requested and add an important clarification:

1. Did I clearly inform the casino about a gambling problem?

I did not explicitly use the term "gambling addiction." However, I clearly and explicitly requested the permanent blocking of the account, stating that it should be permanent and without the possibility of unblocking, which constitutes a valid self-exclusion request in accordance with responsible gambling principles.

2. Did I explicitly state that I wanted permanent self-exclusion after the reflection period?

Yes. In my messages of November 21 and 25, 2025, I requested a permanent block, and on November 25, 2025, the casino itself confirmed in writing that the account had been successfully closed, in accordance with that request. At no point was I informed that it was merely a simple closure or a temporary block.

3. Did I receive any notifications or warnings during the period in which the account was reopened?

No. I received no prior or subsequent warning or explanation.

Important additional clarification:

The account was reopened by CryptoCasino on November 26th, without my request. After the closure was confirmed, I did not submit any request to reactivate the account, nor was I informed that the self-exclusion was no longer in effect.

In summary, I requested a permanent block, the casino confirmed the closure, and subsequently the account was unilaterally reopened, which should not have happened under the cited responsible gaming policies.

Thank you for your time.

I've attached a photo of the reopening after I requested it twice in a row. I never asked for the reopening; I made it clear that it was closed.

Gracias por su respuesta y por la explicación detallada.

A continuación, aclaro los puntos solicitados y añado una precisión importante:

1. ¿Informé claramente al casino sobre un problema con el juego?

No utilicé expresamente el término "adicción al juego". Sin embargo, solicité de forma clara y explícita el bloqueo permanente de la cuenta, indicando que debía ser para siempre y sin posibilidad de desbloqueo, lo cual constituye una solicitud válida de autoexclusión conforme a los principios de juego responsable.

2. ¿Declaré explícitamente que deseaba una autoexclusión permanente tras el período de reflexión?

Sí. En mis mensajes del 21 y 25 de noviembre de 2025 solicité un bloqueo permanente, y el 25 de noviembre de 2025 el propio casino confirmó por escrito que la cuenta había sido cerrada con éxito, conforme a dicha solicitud. En ningún momento se me informó de que se tratara únicamente de un cierre simple ni de un bloqueo temporal.

3. ¿Recibí alguna notificación o advertencia durante el período en que se reabrió la cuenta?

No. No recibí ninguna advertencia ni explicación previa o posterior.

Aclaración adicional importante:

La cuenta fue reabierta por CryptoCasino el día 26 de noviembre, sin que yo solicitara la reapertura. Tras la confirmación del cierre, no realicé ninguna solicitud para reactivar la cuenta, ni se me informó de que la autoexclusión no estuviera en vigor.

En resumen, solicité un bloqueo permanente, el casino confirmó el cierre, y posteriormente la cuenta fue reabierta de forma unilateral, lo que no debería haber ocurrido bajo las políticas de juego responsable citadas.

Gracias por su atención.

adjunto foto de la reapertura después de pedirlo 2 veces consecutiva, yo no pedí la reapertura en ningún momento dejé claro el cierre

Hello,

I have carefully reviewed the casino's Terms and Conditions and also spoken to a moderator, who confirmed that accounts should not be reopened when a block or self-exclusion has been requested.

In my case, I expressly requested the permanent blocking of my account for responsible gambling reasons.

Despite this, the account was later reopened, allowing him to play again.

At the time I made the mistake of accessing the account once it was reopened, but I want to make it clear that I never requested the reopening, and that it should not have occurred under any circumstances if the permanent block had been properly respected.

I will attach the available evidence (emails and communications with support).

I believe this case should be analyzed from the point of view of non-compliance with responsible gambling measures, since the losses suffered would not have occurred if the permanent block had been maintained.

Thank you for reviewing the case.

Hola,

He revisado detenidamente los Términos y Condiciones del casino y también he hablado con un moderador, quien me confirmó que las cuentas no deben reabrirse cuando se ha solicitado un bloqueo o autoexclusión.

En mi caso, solicité de forma expresa el bloqueo permanente de mi cuenta por motivos de juego responsable.

A pesar de ello, la cuenta fue reabierta posteriormente, lo que permitió que pudiera volver a jugar.

En su momento cometí el error de acceder a la cuenta una vez reabierta, pero quiero dejar claro que yo no solicité en ningún momento la reapertura, y que esta no debería haberse producido bajo ninguna circunstancia si el bloqueo permanente se hubiera respetado correctamente.

Voy a adjuntar las pruebas disponibles (correos y comunicaciones con el soporte)

Considero que este caso debe analizarse desde el punto de vista del incumplimiento de las medidas de juego responsable, ya que las pérdidas sufridas no se habrían producido si el bloqueo permanente se hubiera mantenido.

Gracias por la revisión del caso.

Dear Alejandr8888,

Thank you for your reply and for providing the previous details.

I completely understand how upsetting it can feel when you believe the casino did not protect you properly, and I’m truly sorry for the frustration this situation has caused.

For cases like this, a self-exclusion request in which the player clearly states a gambling problem is essential evidence that allows us to proceed further. When submitting a self-exclusion request, it’s important to clearly explain the reason for the request, specify the desired time period, and use a clearly marked and recognizable email subject. Casino support teams receive a high volume of requests each day, and a clear subject line can help ensure your request is processed as quickly as possible.

I also strongly recommend saving a copy of your self-exclusion request, as this serves as important proof.

At this stage, please send another self-exclusion email to CryptoCasino.com and keep me informed of any updates or responses you receive.

Additionally, could you please let us know:

• Whether you had any communication with CryptoCasino support after your account was reopened
• Whether you have records of any financial losses incurred after the reopening, apart from your account history

Thank you very much in advance for your cooperation. We truly appreciate your patience and openness as we review your case.

Thank you for your message and for reviewing my case.

I confirm that I requested the closure/self-exclusion of my account, citing a problem with the game and requesting that it be permanent. The account was subsequently closed, but was later reopened without my request, allowing me to play again.

After the reopening, I did have communication with support and my account remained operational, allowing deposits, KYC and normal play.

Regarding the losses, I can confirm that significant financial losses occurred after the reopening, which can be verified through the account history and casino records.

I understand the importance of keeping copies of the requests and appreciate the clarification. My complaint is based on the fact that there was a self-exclusion request for problem gambling, and yet the account was reactivated, which I consider a breach of the responsible gambling policies.

I remain attentive to any further steps that may need to be taken and I appreciate your support in reviewing this matter.

Gracias por su mensaje y por revisar mi caso.

Confirmo que solicité el cierre/autoexclusión de mi cuenta indicando un problema con el juego y solicitando que fuera permanente. Tras ello, la cuenta fue cerrada, pero posteriormente fue reabierta sin que yo lo solicitara, lo que me permitió volver a jugar.

Después de la reapertura, sí tuve comunicación con el soporte y mi cuenta permaneció operativa, permitiendo depósitos, KYC y juego normal.

En cuanto a las pérdidas, puedo confirmar que se produjeron pérdidas financieras significativas tras la reapertura, las cuales pueden verificarse mediante el historial de la cuenta y los registros del casino.

Entiendo la importancia de conservar copias de las solicitudes y agradezco la aclaración. Mi reclamación se basa en que existía una solicitud de autoexclusión por juego problemático y, aun así, la cuenta fue reactivada, lo cual considero un incumplimiento de las políticas de juego responsable.

Quedo atento a cualquier paso adicional que deba seguir y agradezco su apoyo en la revisión de este asunto.

I'm showing the transactions shared today by Crypto casino

I didn't really know the exact amount. Below you can see 11/25/2025, the day I requested the account be blocked and made the last withdrawal, and above it shows December 20th, when my account should have been closed. I want a fair answer for myself as a player, thank you!

muestro las transacciones compartidas hoy por Crypto casino

Realmente no sabía la cantidad exacta, abajo se puede apreciar el 25/11/2025 , el día que pedí el bloqueo y hice el último retiro y arriba el día 20 de diciembre, cuando mi cuenta debería estar cerrada , Quiero una respuesta justa para mí como jugador , gracias!

A

Dear Alejandr8888

Thank you for your cooperation and for providing all the necessary information. I truly appreciate the time and effort you’ve taken to share everything with us so far.

Your complaint will now move to the next stage of our process and be handled by your dedicated Resolver Matej ([email protected]). This is a standard step in our procedure, as the Resolver will take over communication with the casino directly and manage your case from this point onward.

No action is required from you right now. Your Resolver will reach out through this thread if any additional details are needed. You can rest assured that your case is in very capable hands.

I wish you the best of luck and hope your case will be resolved to your satisfaction soon.

Kind regards,

Petra

Hello Alejandr8888, nice to meet you!

My name is Matej, and I will be assisting you with this case. I'll do my best to help you resolve this issue as soon as possible.

I’d like to invite a representative of CryptoCasino.com to join the conversation and participate in the investigation of this case as well. Could you possibly provide additional information regarding the issue with self-exclusion and clarify the situation? I would also appreciate if the casino could provide us with any and all relevant evidence. Any sensitive information or internal system files can be shared with me directly by e-mail [email protected].

Thank you for your patience and cooperation in advance.

Hi Matej,

Thank you for taking on my case.

On November 25th, I requested the blocking/self-exclusion of my account. Despite this, the casino allowed me to continue accessing it, making deposits, and engaging in other activity after that date.

I believe this constitutes a clear breach of the blocking request and a failure in the casino's internal controls.

I am willing to provide any additional evidence needed, including communications and exact dates of deposits made after November 25.

Thank you for your help.

Hola Matej,

Gracias por asumir mi caso.

El 25 de noviembre solicité el bloqueo / autoexclusión de mi cuenta. A pesar de ello, el casino permitió que siguiera teniendo acceso, realizando depósitos y actividad posterior a esa fecha.

Considero que esto constituye un incumplimiento claro de la solicitud de bloqueo y un fallo en los controles internos del casino.

Estoy dispuesto a proporcionar cualquier prueba adicional necesaria, incluyendo comunicaciones y fechas exactas de los depósitos realizados después del 25 de noviembre.

Gracias por su ayuda.

All the evidence was provided; I expect a fair response for me as a player.

Todas las pruebas fueron proporcionadas, espero una respuesta justa para mí como jugador

Thank you for the casino's response.

I would like to clarify a fundamental point: on multiple occasions I expressly informed support that I am addicted to gambling and that I needed my account to be blocked.

It wasn't simply a request for ordinary closure, but rather communications where I clearly acknowledged a gambling problem.

If the casino had explicit knowledge of my vulnerability, I believe it should have implemented enhanced protection measures and prevented any reopening or subsequent creation of accounts linked to my identity, especially after performing KYC on several occasions.

I understand there were multiple accounts, but that precisely demonstrates that the preventative controls were not effective despite clear signs of risk.

I request that it be assessed whether the responsible gambling measures were sufficient once the casino was explicitly informed of my addiction.

Gracias por la respuesta del casino.

Quisiera aclarar un punto fundamental: en múltiples ocasiones informé expresamente al soporte que soy adicto al juego y que necesitaba que mi cuenta fuera bloqueada.

No se trató simplemente de una solicitud de cierre ordinario, sino de comunicaciones donde reconocí claramente un problema de juego.

Si el casino tenía conocimiento explícito de mi vulnerabilidad, considero que debió aplicar medidas de protección reforzadas y evitar cualquier reapertura o creación posterior de cuentas vinculadas a mi identidad, especialmente tras realizar KYC en varias ocasiones.

Entiendo que hubo múltiples cuentas, pero precisamente eso demuestra que los controles preventivos no fueron eficaces pese a existir señales claras de riesgo.

Solicito que se evalúe si las medidas de juego responsable fueron suficientes una vez que el casino fue informado explícitamente de mi adicción.

I would like to clarify an important point regarding the dates November 21 and 25.

As the casino itself states, I requested the closure on November 21st and again on November 25th. More than 24 hours passed between these two dates, exceeding the supposed cooling-off period they mention.

Furthermore, as can be seen in the screenshots provided, the casino responded and confirmed the account closure.

Therefore, I don't understand how they can now argue that the process was not completed correctly, when there is express confirmation from the support team.

It's also true that I was later able to open new accounts and complete KYC processes with different email addresses. That's precisely the point: if the casino already knew my identity and my previous account blocking requests due to gambling issues, how was it possible that I was allowed to continue creating verified accounts?

I do not deny that I opened new accounts, but I believe that, after explicitly stating my gambling problem and requesting a block, the casino should have applied stricter measures to prevent this from happening.

I request that internal records be reviewed to verify if the closure was confirmed and if responsible gaming controls were properly implemented after November.

Quisiera aclarar un punto importante respecto a las fechas 21 y 25 de noviembre.

Tal como el propio casino afirma, solicité el cierre el 21 de noviembre y nuevamente el 25 de noviembre. Entre ambas fechas transcurrieron más de 24 horas, superando el supuesto periodo de enfriamiento que mencionan.

Además, como puede verse en las capturas aportadas, el casino respondió y confirmó el cierre de la cuenta.

Por tanto, no entiendo cómo ahora argumentan que el proceso no fue completado correctamente, cuando existe confirmación expresa por parte del soporte.

También es cierto que posteriormente pude abrir nuevas cuentas y completar procesos de KYC con distintos correos electrónicos. Precisamente ese es el punto: si el casino ya tenía conocimiento de mi identidad y de mis solicitudes previas de bloqueo por problemas de juego, ¿cómo fue posible que se me permitiera seguir creando cuentas verificadas?

No niego que abrí nuevas cuentas, pero considero que, tras haber declarado explícitamente mi problema con el juego y haber solicitado bloqueo, el casino debía haber aplicado medidas más estrictas para evitar que esto sucediera.

Solicito que se revisen los registros internos para verificar si el cierre fue confirmado y si los controles de juego responsable fueron aplicados correctamente después de noviembre.

HERE YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE MY BLOCK REQUEST AND THE CRYPTOCASINO TEAM'S VERIFICATION RESPONSE

AQUI SE PUEDE VER CLARAMENTE LA PETICIÓN DE MI BLOQUEO Y LA RESPUESTA DE VERIFICACIÓN DEL EQUIPO DE CRYPTOCASINO

I also want to clarify the point regarding multiple accounts.

It is true that I created several accounts, and the casino itself acknowledged having detected this situation in early December, as they informed me by email.

That's precisely why I consider this point relevant: if the casino had already detected the use of multiple accounts linked to my identity, and was also aware of my statements about gambling addiction and blocking requests, I don't understand how it was possible that I was allowed to continue registering new accounts, completing multiple KYC verifications, and making large deposits.

Once the operator detects multiple accounts and has explicit knowledge of vulnerability due to problem gambling, I believe that the responsibility for applying stricter technical and preventative measures falls on the casino.

I do not deny my conduct, but I do question the effectiveness of the controls implemented after being warned.

I request an evaluation of whether, after detecting multiple accounts and receiving communications about addiction, the casino acted with due diligence to prevent further harm.

Quiero aclarar también el punto relativo a las múltiples cuentas.

Es cierto que creé varias cuentas, y el propio casino reconoció haber detectado esta situación a principios de diciembre, ya que me lo comunicaron por correo electrónico.

Precisamente por eso considero que este punto es relevante: si el casino ya había detectado el uso de múltiples cuentas vinculadas a mi identidad, y además tenía constancia de mis declaraciones sobre adicción al juego y solicitudes de bloqueo, no entiendo cómo fue posible que se me permitiera continuar registrando nuevas cuentas, completar múltiples verificaciones KYC y realizar depósitos de importes elevados.

Una vez que el operador detecta multicuentas y tiene conocimiento explícito de vulnerabilidad por juego problemático, considero que la responsabilidad de aplicar medidas técnicas y preventivas más estrictas recae en el casino.

No niego mi conducta, pero sí cuestiono la efectividad de los controles implementados tras haber sido advertidos.

Solicito que se evalúe si, después de detectar multicuentas y recibir comunicaciones sobre adicción, el casino actuó con la diligencia adecuada para prevenir daños adicionales.

I would like to provide additional relevant information and I am also attaching a screenshot of the corresponding email as proof.

On December 20, the casino informed me via email that it had detected multiple accounts and that one of them had been closed for violating the rule of one account per player.

After receiving that email, I replied explicitly:

"I also want to block this account forever, I'm a gambling addict."

This statement was not a simple request for ordinary closure, but an explicit manifestation of gambling addiction and a request for permanent blocking.

Therefore:

The casino had already detected multiple accounts linked to me.

The casino had direct knowledge of my gambling problem.

Despite this, I was later able to continue creating accounts, completing KYC verifications, and making large deposits.

If the operator had already identified the situation and also received an explicit declaration of addiction with a request for permanent blocking, I believe that he should have applied stricter technical and preventive measures to prevent any further activity.

I do not deny having created additional accounts, but I question whether the responsible gambling controls were truly effective once the casino was fully aware of my vulnerability.

I request that internal records be reviewed to verify what measures were implemented following my declaration of gambling addiction and request for permanent account blocking.

Quisiera aportar información adicional relevante y adjunto también la captura del correo correspondiente como prueba.

El 20 de diciembre el casino me informó por correo electrónico que había detectado múltiples cuentas y que una de ellas había sido cerrada por incumplir la regla de una sola cuenta por jugador.

Tras recibir ese correo, respondí expresamente:

"También quiero bloquear esta cuenta para siempre, soy ludópata."

Esta declaración no fue una simple solicitud de cierre ordinario, sino una manifestación explícita de adicción al juego y una petición de bloqueo permanente.

Por tanto:

El casino ya había detectado múltiples cuentas vinculadas a mí.

El casino tenía conocimiento directo de mi problema de juego.

A pesar de ello, posteriormente pude seguir creando cuentas, completar verificaciones KYC y realizar depósitos de importes elevados.

Si el operador ya había identificado la situación y además recibió una declaración explícita de adicción con solicitud de bloqueo permanente, considero que debía haber aplicado medidas técnicas y preventivas más estrictas para impedir cualquier nueva actividad.

No niego haber creado cuentas adicionales, pero cuestiono si los controles de juego responsable fueron realmente efectivos una vez que el casino tenía pleno conocimiento de mi vulnerabilidad.

Solicito que se revisen los registros internos para verificar qué medidas se implementaron tras mi declaración de ludopatía y solicitud de bloqueo permanente.

I would like to conclude by reiterating that my intention is not to prolong this conflict, but to find a fair and reasonable solution for both parties.

I acknowledge that there were mistakes on my part, but I also believe that, once the casino had explicit knowledge of my gambling problem and the multiple accounts linked to my identity, stricter measures could have been applied to prevent the situation from escalating.

Therefore, I would like to propose that an amicable solution be considered, one that takes into account all the circumstances of the case. I am willing to engage in good-faith dialogue to reach a balanced agreement without further escalating this dispute.

I am confident that we can resolve this in a professional and constructive manner.

Quisiera finalizar reiterando que mi intención no es prolongar este conflicto, sino encontrar una solución justa y razonable para ambas partes.

Reconozco que hubo errores por mi parte, pero también considero que, una vez que el casino tuvo conocimiento explícito de mi problema de juego y de las múltiples cuentas vinculadas a mi identidad, podrían haberse aplicado medidas más estrictas para evitar que la situación escalara.

Por ello, me gustaría proponer que se valore una solución amistosa que tenga en cuenta todas las circunstancias del caso. Estoy dispuesto a dialogar de buena fe para alcanzar un acuerdo equilibrado sin necesidad de seguir escalando esta disputa.

Confío en que podamos resolverlo de manera profesional y constructiva.

I would like to thank both parties for provided evidence and further explanation of the view points. I think I have pretty clear idea of what has happened, and will do my best to mediate an outcome feasible for the player as well as the casino. Before moving forward, I would like to make clear couple of things up, to explain Casino Guru's stance on multiple issues within this complaint, so everyone knows the reasoning behind further mediation.

• Semi-anonymous Crypto Casino

Dear Alejandr8888, CryptoCasino.com is a semi anonymous crypto casino, where you can register using just an e-mail address and your crypto wallet. Since their main marketing draw is the anonymity, that means regular player protection does not apply here. Creating a new e-mail takes about 3 minutes, and filling out your profile details is optionable. There is no way how the casino can identify you in time, or keep you away. While I will do my best to help you in this case, any further complaints against this casino - or any anonymous/semi-anonymous casinos, will be rejected. This is simply because there is nothing they can do to stop you re-registering. If you do not start using BetBlocker or some other tools to stay safe from this kind of casinos, Casino Guru will not be able to help in the future. This is because such action is bordering on misuse of the self-exclusion rules through semi-anonymity of the casino. I know as a gambler you can't help it, but we have to draw a line somewhere, to ensure less scrupulous players will not misuse this and our mediation process for fraud.

• Player profile and payment method

With the above in mind, I will be focusing on the player profile and payment method used in each of your account. If you have filled it with your real credentials before depositing and playing, I will mediate a refund for you. If you deposited anonymously and only filled out the profile after the loss (or never filled the profile details at all), I won't be able to do anything - coming back to the anonymity of the users. I'll request details from the casino and will update you about this later on. Despite anonymity, in cases of self-exclusion the casino needs to keep your credentials in the system, for future reference. This is the only way to keep players safe and once the credentials are properly filled in, system should flag you for checks.

• KYC

This ties into the previous point and I will have to find out whether a full KYC has been done, and if it was done only once or multiple times. Since your credentials should already be in the system, you should not be able to pass another KYC and be allowed to play.

• The 24 hour cool-off period

We find this an unnecessary hoop for a gambling addict to jump through, in order to get self-excluded. We believe that once the gambling addiction is stated, the casino should do everything they can to block the account as soon as feasible. A lot can change in 24 hours and we do not consider this to be adequate system. A cool off period for regular account closure would be alright, but not in case of gambling addiction. We believe no reputable casino would want to have gambling addicts for customers, so giving them time to "reconsider is counter-productive. Therefore, I will always consider the first request for self-exclusion as the starting point.

With this being said, I will now request details from the casino representative, figure out how was each account dealt with and then I will post my findings in this thread alongside with proposed solution. Thank you for your understanding.

I'd like to clarify that KYC wasn't always performed before the first deposit, but mainly when I tried to make withdrawals. However, once the KYC process was completed with my real information and my identity was verified, I was allowed to continue depositing and playing.

Therefore, from the moment my identity was confirmed in the system, the casino was fully aware that it was the same person who had previously requested a block and declared gambling addiction.

I believe that, based on that verification, technical measures should have been applied to prevent further activity

Quisiera aclarar que el KYC no siempre se realizó antes del primer depósito, sino principalmente cuando intenté realizar retiros. Sin embargo, una vez completado el proceso KYC con mis datos reales y verificada mi identidad, se me permitió continuar depositando y jugando.

Por tanto, desde el momento en que mi identidad quedó confirmada en el sistema, el casino tenía pleno conocimiento de que se trataba de la misma persona que previamente había solicitado bloqueo y declarado ludopatía.

Considero que, a partir de esa verificación, deberían haberse aplicado medidas técnicas para impedir nueva actividad

I would like to specifically clarify the point regarding the 24-hour period mentioned by the casino.

On November 21st, I requested the closure of my account and was told I had to wait 24 hours. Subsequently, on November 25th, I requested the closure again, making it clear that I did not want any additional waiting period and that I wanted a permanent block.

Despite this, on November 26th my account became active again without my having requested its reopening, which led to subsequent activity during the month of December and significant losses.

Furthermore, after explicitly declaring my gambling addiction and requesting a permanent account block, the casino was aware that I had multiple linked accounts. However, I was allowed to continue accessing existing accounts and opening new ones, completing KYC processes without any issues.

I believe that, once my addiction was declared and permanent exclusion was requested, and given that the operator was aware of multiple accounts linked to my identity, effective technical measures should have been applied to prevent any further activity.

I request a detailed review of internal records to verify how the November 25th request was handled and why subsequent activity was permitted.

I am attaching my closure request again along with the casino's response.

As you can see, my request is clear and explicit. Furthermore, the casino's response confirms receipt of this request and even provides me with a link to help for players with gambling problems.

Therefore, I believe that the operator was fully aware of both my intention to permanently block my account and my vulnerable situation.

I request that this communication be taken into account as a determining point in the chronology of the case.

And it was opened on the 26th

Quisiera aclarar específicamente el punto relativo al período de 24 horas mencionado por el casino.

El día 21 de noviembre solicité el cierre de mi cuenta y se me indicó que debía esperar 24 horas. Posteriormente, el día 25 de noviembre volví a solicitar el cierre, dejando claro que no quería ningún período adicional de reflexión y que deseaba un bloqueo permanente.

A pesar de ello, el día 26 de noviembre mi cuenta volvió a estar activa sin que yo hubiera solicitado su reapertura, lo que dio lugar a actividad posterior durante el mes de diciembre y a pérdidas significativas.

Además, tras declarar expresamente mi ludopatía y solicitar el bloqueo permanente, el casino era consciente de que yo tenía múltiples cuentas vinculadas. Sin embargo, se me permitió seguir accediendo a cuentas existentes y abrir nuevas cuentas, completando procesos KYC sin impedimentos.

Considero que, una vez declarada mi adicción y solicitada la exclusión permanente, y teniendo el operador conocimiento de múltiples cuentas vinculadas a mi identidad, debieron aplicarse medidas técnicas efectivas para impedir cualquier nueva actividad.

Solicito que se revisen detalladamente los registros internos para verificar cómo se gestionó la solicitud del 25 de noviembre y por qué se permitió actividad posterior.

Adjunto nuevamente mi solicitud de cierre junto con la respuesta del casino.

Como puede observarse, mi petición es clara y expresa. Además, la respuesta del casino confirma la recepción de dicha solicitud e incluso me facilita un enlace de ayuda para jugadores con problemas de juego.

Por ello, considero que existía pleno conocimiento por parte del operador tanto de mi intención de bloqueo permanente como de mi situación de vulnerabilidad.

Solicito que se tenga en cuenta esta comunicación como punto determinante en la cronología del caso.

Y el día 26 fue abierta

We would like to ask the casino to reply to this complaint. We are extending the timer by 7 days. If the casino fails to respond in the set time frame, we will close the complaint as ‘unresolved’ which may negatively affect its rating.