The betting company is liable of not getting the user away from it once they spot the player is addicted.
I didn't use any VPN, I didn't fake my ID, I didn't change my device! Do you get it?
They didn't made everything they could. At very least they should apologize for this and refund those funds for a goodwill gesture, and fixing their system to do not allow such things in the future for others.
So if they close an account, then somehow they accidently reopen an account, it is only fault of the user to fall on it and play? NO< they are liable to keep the user distant in some manners.
ofc they can allege the user uses vpn and other stuff to circunvent it, which makes their job pretty impossible -
but it isn't my case.- I had full KYC Lvl 5 on both accounts in my name;
- I have emails with evidences that they knew it was a duplicated account;
- I used the same device;
- I used same internet;
- I used same wallet;
How difficult is to do 1+1? and making the user away from it closing all his accounts at once?
No, they are not liable for any damage happened to you due to your own action [or inaction], there is a point on the self-exclusion that's bound to you when you applied for the self-exclusion program.
Another interesting thing that come to my awareness when re-reading your story, if you're really just forgot to mention the other account, that it didn't cross your mind because they didn't ask, or you assume that they remember that you own two accounts, why do you use singular form when you
ask about the banned account?
"can you please confirm that my account is permanently closed?" you said, not "my accounts".
Granted, English is not your main language, but your English is very good throughout this entire thread. I personally think if someone really has the best interest to put himself in an exclusion and just happened to forgot to mention the other account because it was not asked, they will not forgot to use the plural form when they ask for confirmation whether they've been completely locked out or not.
Add that to some discrepancies in your story like how you said you've been away for three days before trying to log in with other account, other statement said it's two days, while the other post shows it happened on 3rd and 4th of February, after only one day, I think it is fair if we consider this scenario below is what possibly actually transpires:
You ask for self-exclusion, realized shortly after that your other account was not restricted and the possibility that entails, made a "solid alibi" by asking to their representative [completely leaving out the part that you ask for self-exception] through the restricted account whether
that account is permanently closed, conveniently leaving the other account under the guise of "didn't cross your mind", and here we are.
But that's just me and my theory. I usually don't send a PM to representatives while they've been invited by someone else to avoid redundancies, but I have to agree that perhaps Razer can shed some light into this story or, Razer probably even have his own wisdom regarding this and take a step to clear it. Thus, even though you've send him a PM, I'll try to invite him here and see how the story looks from his side.
