Topic: Roobet.com Allowing self excluded players Gambling addicted to continue playing (Read 1129 times)

CasinoGuru marked the case as "rejected" as they can no longer help mediating the case upon OP's decision to refuse the settlement and proceed with legal path.

For same reason [OP taking legal action against the casino] as we don't know how long will the case be dragged in court, I'll mark this as "inactive". OP, I would appreciate if you would come back here later in the future when you have the court ruling in your hand.

I suppose there is no way out of this situation for you except the legal action. If your lawyers serve them papers and get them inside a courtroom, they will be facing a very powerful legal team. If you end up losing, they might ask the judge for you to pay their legal fees. I think this has to be taken in to consideration when you contemplate the next step.

Well, this does not seem be ending in a certain victory for the OP. If he has decided this is the course of action he wants to follow and he knows what he is doing then I am sure he will the thread updated.

He has some experience in several legal suits against his country and school despite his very young [22 years old] age, so I choose to believe [the italic being an over-exagerrated emphasize] he knows what he's doing and have been assessing the possible outcome of the next action he said he'll take: suing the casino.


Actually, to be precise, the human error part is talking about the first account, Pokemon55.

So, the situation was, OP asked for a ban [not exclusion] for Pokemon55, got it banned, created second account, happynewyear2024, triggered responsible gambling act and got excluded, created third account, newhere23232, and got refunded due to the previous account already excluded and he shouldn't be able to make this third one. And, ultimately, asked for a refund for the second account as well, under reason that he should have been excluded since Pokemon55 and thus, shouldn't be able to create happynewyear2024 too.

Why they say that it's human error as the ban should be treated as self-exclusion while they actually already treat it as self-exclusion by asking him to answer the addiction assessment prior to unlocking it, or why they didn't brought it up to the mediator on CG that the reason they unlocked the first account is because he lied throughout the entire questions [which ultimately made the self-exclusion itself failed to lock in and took place], are the two things that I don't understand.


He is not trying to take advantage. He assured us many times that he don't have that intent. So it must be true.

Hypothetically, if the OP had won $10,000 on the second account but when he tried to withdraw was blocked by the casino citing the error of not excluding the account and instead offered to reimburse the deposit and close the account. Would the OP accept it? Or another scenario, if the OP got to the point where he was allowed to withdraw but after he withdrew he was retrospectively asked to have the funds returned (because he should never have been allowed to play in the first place), would the OP return the funds?


I have reported bug on another site where i could make any $ i wanted and feel free to withdraw it without them notice it but i reported it to them ?
it was  case opening site and their devolopers have confirmed my account was somehow bugged first time they saw this where i could won random items from cases the 2-3$ cases would give me items of another way way more expensive  cases i could spam these cases and always win but i reported it and got f 5% extra of my last deposit hahahha

From the above i just wanna say that i dont want any $ that is not mine like legitimate won or anyting and if they have asked for it to be returned i would do it if they said we goona sue u or whatever

To dont quote replies again il just do it this and answer all above

I had 1 more account which maded during the complaint and i have informed casino guru about it after  i just made it i maded that account and put the same kyc informatios and on my suprise they system actually started working and they banned that acccount not that they took 5h but okey

https://imgur.com/F97jX5O

Well now i wonder why have they said the account Pokemon55 have been blocked why this didnt happened when i opened the second account where i lost 10k or the third one

I could be wrong but it seems to me the OP took advantage of the fact the second account was not excluded and thought he could always (rightly) claim he was a problem gambler and try to get those funds back blaming the casino for not blocking the account.

If i wanted to do that i would not create a third account and play again few months later

If my plan was to play risk free or whatever i would just play roulette or some sports with low house edge and cover it on another casino and then make complaints so i get even more money at the end

They have confirmed its on their end human error they didnt close the accounts + 9 of their agents have said the same it doesnt matter if the account is just locked per your request the second maded account would be too until u clear the ban on the first and thats it


https://imgur.com/IcEtVrL
Its clear as day casino acknowledged its their human error but dont wanna refund so now i ask why they put as reason for closing the complaint i didnt want to sign a documents where i say its my mistake xdd and i dont want anymore $ to be paid why the complaint is closed as our verdict other  why is it not  black points for the casino if they said its their mistake ??

I did my best after your advice and was prepared for the Casino Guru link but still found the episode elongated and tedious. At some point I had to give up in order to scroll towards the bottom of the page. The final few exchanges captured the important parts. The casino was willing to settle for what they thought was reasonable based on the third account but the OP wants the $10,000 to cover losses associated with the second account.

I have no idea why he would threaten to take legal action when the process will be expensive. Also, there is no guarantee on how long the process will take or ven if he will win. If he goes ahead with litigation it is a risk because all this is for the disputed amount of $10,000.

The casino cited human error for overlooking the second account not being excluded but will not make any payments related to it. Even though they should have excluded the second account, to which degree are they liable for losses? That is a very important question.

Hypothetically, if the OP had won $10,000 on the second account but when he tried to withdraw was blocked by the casino citing the error of not excluding the account and instead offered to reimburse the deposit and close the account. Would the OP accept it? Or another scenario, if the OP got to the point where he was allowed to withdraw but after he withdrew he was retrospectively asked to have the funds returned (because he should never have been allowed to play in the first place), would the OP return the funds?

I could be wrong but it seems to me the OP took advantage of the fact the second account was not excluded and thought he could always (rightly) claim he was a problem gambler and try to get those funds back blaming the casino for not blocking the account.

I guess I contributed a little for that difficulties, as my reply is usually long and detailed. When that got quoted and the quote got quoted... sumimasen.

I would advise you to prepare a nice cup of coffee if you want to read OP's thread on CG, as it's more... seven-course-meal-of-words-and-sentences. With his consecutive posts [that made the mediator gently informed him that it make things hard to understand], posts being made private, posts with links to screenshots, another consecutive posts, and here come the third meal.

Ehm, anyway, to answer your question in simple,


First, the casino is ready to settle for 508.72, which come from the total deposit from OP's third account. After several factors and input being considered, they bumped it to 600 as their final offer.

Second, OP asked for 10,000+ USD aside from that 508.72/600, under a reason that it was the amount he lost during his second account.

If I may give a better and more in-depth explanation [while trying to be as short as I can], kindly refer to the timeline I made as it might help understanding the event chronologies easier.

OP made three accounts [well, actually four, and maybe more, but let's not dip our toe into that]. He asked for a ban on first account as his attempt to self-exclude. They didn't treat it as self-exclusion request as a few days later he asked for the ban to be lifted and they gave him six problematic gambling self-assessment questions, that he smoothly passed through dishonest answer. The first account later on requested for a ban-with-no-option-to-unban and OP did not use this account anymore. OP assumed this as a self exclusion. The casino did not, as there were no explicit words asking for it [regardless of what OP tried to counter-prove by series of chats to live support to validate this argument]. This is the same conclusion that's made by CG.

Now, move to the second account. On this account, OP lost 10,000+ USD, made a statement that triggered the problematic gambler alarm and kick the responsible gambling act to take action, blocking the account and officially [through casino's POV] marked OP as gambling addict. However, he managed to create third account, spent 508.72 USD, of which the casino admitted is their fault as the OP should have been excluded. Thus they're willing to reimburse. And thus, the amount.

The root of this situation is simple: OP treated his first plea to "ban with no option to unban" as a self exclusion. The casino simply treated it as a request to lock his account. Casino applied self-exclusion from the closure of second account forward, thus, third account will get reimbursed. OP insist self-exclusion should be activated from the point of "ban with no option to unban", thus his second account should not be allowed by Roobet, and is eligible for refund too.

This thread has become very difficult to read through because of walls of text that are quoted by the OP. If the OP would refrain from quoting several long posts when making a reply, it would make it very easy on the eyes to process what is being stated. I cannot be the only one here that has a problem reading through this thread.

Just in order to understand the situation, I have two questions that I would appreciate answers to.

First, how much did the casino offer to settle the matter?
Second, how much does the OP want to settle the matter?

No, there was no other or further meaningful communication with them in regards to "deal with you in private". I believe what they're willing to offer has been served to the table, and the only thing that remains is to wish you good luck on that next attempt you tried to pull.

Yep il not going to sign that and im going to continue

Was there any respond from ther with your private connections to them or not? so i dont make another complaints to their licence if they wanna deal with me in private or whatever

Well, it's your call. If you deemed it better to refuse to settle and pursue legal actions, suit yourself.

My two cents though, is to take it. Given you're with several legal/lawsuit experience, I believe the reason behind that logic, as I described here is not hard to grasp, that --IMO-- the best deal is what they currently gave.

Well i dont agree with that document and im not going to sign it thats it if i sign that it means  roobet have paid me everyting  and  i cant sue or make complaints about anyting anymore or talk to anyone about what happened

have u got any updated about your private connections to roobet ?

im just waiting for final answer and the complaint to get closed on casino guru and i send complaint to the email of XNET  their licence if not help there i got still few ways to do it

Let me try to be as not condescending yet as simple as I can explaining this: a settlement agreement means both parties agree to a certain amount of fund to get the issue between them resolved.

It's either-or.

Either you agree with the deal offered and ready to settle or you refuse them completely and pursue other path.

You can't cut it in the middle where it favored you by agreeing for settlement fund and then later on taking other course of action for other reimbursement that you seek but not offered in the agreement. All issues are done and closed in that deal. Consider them no longer exist. So, from their last reply on CG as shown on your screenshot, it's either you accept 600 USD and be happy with it, or you leave the room without it and go to other "room" [like court or or other path imaginable].

I assume they do not want to change the agreement in that way so i can continue with complaints or legal actions for the second account
I told them if they dont want to do that they can close the complaint on casino guru and they will probably do it without any refunds because i dont want to accept that type of agreement where they limit me to do anyting further or say a word about this case after i sign that shit document
Heres photos https://imgur.com/dVjoAXO
Also they offer me 100$ extra for idk what reason xd i dont want em keep them
heres my respond to their answer which is still not approved and it will be probably put as sensitive because i have attached a photo of one of their sponsored streamer teaching their players how to bypass the kyc system and put fake details into it so they can play from banned countries
https://imgur.com/2sH0XDS

https://imgur.com/MgqWG3w

The last time i uplaoded that picture in the casino guru complaint they put it as sensitive ? why hahaha and no one either roobet or casino guru agent commented it

Okey il update u here if they are willing to change their document the agreement
Also i will wait for you if u got some more info with your private connections w them

Good. Keep us updated.


Uhh, no. For the same reason with what I'll say to them suppose the role was reversed with you being the one I reached through personal means of communication and they who ask what did you say: I can't share what the other said in private nature of personal communication without their consent.

Though, I can assure you that the content doesn't matter much.

I have texted them about it to be changed and some small changes we will see if they accept it

Btw can i know what have they  said ?

Well, yes. Though probably sounds very coincidental, I, in fact, got a reply just earlier today regarding it.


And you do aware that the document is open to be revised as long as it's yet to be signed by both parties, right? That's why it's called settlement agreement, as in both parties agree to settle with the clauses contained within.

You're free to ask for revision, though whether they'll accept those changes... it completely depend on both parties ability to negotiate.


Refer to my previous post about the only guarantee for them that the settlement are enforced.


He opened with, that you somehow missed because you somehow only read the sentence after it, "My stance from the previous reply still stands. There is only a refund to be made for the account newhere2332. The details have been previously explained."

With "the details previously explained" refers to several posts made by Michal that exhaustively detailed about why he think the only account eligible to be reimbursed is newhere23232, as well as his suggestion to [freely interpreted] take the deal and stop trying to get another account reimbursed.

was  there any luck of them responding to it ? if u contacted them
Btw i have read the whole document they send and they are trying to hide the account where  i have lost the 10k$ + they named every other account i have said on their site but the happynewyear24 is nowhere to be seen

Also it says e) It has been fully reimbursed for all losses it suffered and is not entitled to any additional
refund;
Well he said feel free to open complaints at other sites but if i sign this documents im will not be eligible to receive any refund for the second account if i somehow win againts roobet either with lawyer or with complaints try their casino licence

I actually had, right after my post on #64.

I can understand the clause on the agreement they send you about legal action. I believe that is what every casinos propose as one or two points in their settlement agreement. After all, I believe, that's the only guarantee they [as in every casinos] can enforce that someone didn't try to rip them by asking for more through legal actions after they both agreed to settle. It's called settlement agreement not for nothing.

As for... CasinoGuru informing you about the opposite? Which one is it? I just from your thread on CG, can't find any post from Michal stating that. Unless you're referring to this one, which... I believe what he said is actually very clear.