Roobet.com | SELF-EXCLUSION BREACH / ALLOWING PLAYERS FROM RESTRICTED TERRITORY

[edondoko]

[...]
Holydarkness should chime in and send this thread to his contacts. Maybe I’ll get an actual reply from Roobet—or at least from him—about their final answer. This isn’t just for my clarification, but for everyone else to understand why the casino let this screw-up happen. I want an answer as to why it happened and what they’re going to do about it.[...]

Holydarkness what?

I believe that "should" in your sentence refers to a polite request, like "I will appreciate holydarkness's insight and attempt to reach Roobet" instead of a demand like, "holydarkness have to reach Roobet to address my issue"?

Hey, I get it! Sorry if I came off a bit harsh with my request. My intention was more of a polite push for you to share your insight and maybe reach out to Roobet, rather than making it sound like a demand. I’m just trying to understand things better, and I appreciate any help.

By the way, my English isn’t perfect either—I’m using AI to translate my responses from german, and sometimes it might mess with the logic or grammar a bit. Thanks for your patience!

[edondoko]

Here's the problem: you are the one breaking your own country's laws here; not Roobet. Switzerland has absolutely no jurisdiction over Roobet, but they do over you. If anyone is going to get in trouble, its you and/or your internet services provider for not blocking access to Roobet (although I'm guessing you were accessing it via VPN as you were with Stake).

Your government goes out of their way to blacklist every online casino there is... You knew about this which is why you used a VPN in the first place. Then only after you lost did you concoct a scheme to get your money back; not once but twice now. If it didn't work the first time, what makes you think it will work a second?

At this point, it doesn't matter whether anyone supports me or not. I lose nothing but time, but they lose money and reputation—so honestly, I couldn't care less if you're on my side or not.

Because your case is spurious, they lose neither.

Exactly that. So sick of people coming to this forum blaming casinos while they know damn sure that they were not supposed to play on that site. If he had won there would not be any problem. But no, he bet on the wrong horse so to speak and his last resort is blaming the casino and requesting a refund. This nonsense won't work though, unlucky again. First stake, now roobet, anyone taking bets which casino will be blamed next?

It's amazing how you keep coming back to blame me for everything. You seem to think I was fully aware of the casino being blacklisted, but that’s just not true. I only discovered Roobet after I got blocked at Stake, and at that point, I was looking for a crypto casino that I thought was legitimate for Swiss players. I had no idea about the Geldspielgesetz, and if Roobet had clearly stated that it was not allowed or had blocked my account or just wouldn‘t accept my Documents, I wouldn't have played there following the block from Stake.

It seems like you're more interested in attacking me than actually understanding the situation. The focus shouldn’t be solely on me; Roobet gave misleading information when I asked if I could play there. I trusted their response, but it turns out they straight up lied. Very sad to see for such a big casino.

You’ve been attempting to shift the blame onto me instead of addressing the casino’s actions. If you think my case is so flawed, why not present evidence against it instead of just pointing fingers? If you can’t do that, maybe it’s time for you to step back and let others contribute who actually have relevant experience or similar cases to discuss.

[edondoko]

Here's the problem: you are the one breaking your own country's laws here; not Roobet. Switzerland has absolutely no jurisdiction over Roobet, but they do over you. If anyone is going to get in trouble, its you and/or your internet services provider for not blocking access to Roobet (although I'm guessing you were accessing it via VPN as you were with Stake).

Your government goes out of their way to blacklist every online casino there is... You knew about this which is why you used a VPN in the first place. Then only after you lost did you concoct a scheme to get your money back; not once but twice now. If it didn't work the first time, what makes you think it will work a second?

At this point, it doesn't matter whether anyone supports me or not. I lose nothing but time, but they lose money and reputation—so honestly, I couldn't care less if you're on my side or not.

Because your case is spurious, they lose neither.

Oh man, you really don’t know what you’re talking about, do you? Let me break it down real slow for you.

Switzerland absolutely has jurisdiction over Roobet.

Why? Because Roobet violated Swiss administrative criminal law (Verwaltungsstrafrecht) by operating without a valid license and offering services to Swiss residents, which is illegal under Swiss gambling laws. Swiss authorities (ESBK) have the legal right to pursue action against them.

It doesn’t matter if Roobet is based in Curacao, on a pirate ship, or on the damn moon. The moment they illegally offer services in Switzerland, Swiss law applies. That’s how international law works.

Now, let’s address your nonsense about me "breaking the law."

You claim that I could be held accountable for playing there? Wrong. The GSG explicitly states that Swiss players are not committing a crime by gambling on an unlicensed platform. However, the money wagered is considered illegal, and as such, it can be confiscated by the ESBK.

Meaning? I can't be held accountable—but Roobet can.

If I had been at a net profit and they refused to withdraw my winnings, they would be legally allowed to under Swiss law. However, since they knowingly accepted my deposits and wagers despite being illegal in Switzerland, they profited unlawfully. At this point, I can inform the ESBK, and both my deposit and any winnings could be confiscated in a criminal lawsuit.

In other words: Roobet doesn’t get to keep the money—they lose it all.

Oh, but wait—you probably still think ESBK has "zero influence" over these casinos?

Then explain this:

📌 ESBK Email regarding my case with Stake:

https://ibb.co/FqNLj8DR

📌 Article about Stake Lawsuit:

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-made/f1-sauber-cleared-of-unauthorized-advertising-rules-swiss-commission/79738912#:~:text=The%20SFGB%20therefore%20initiated%20an,should%20generally%20be%20considered%20advertising

So they had enough influence to hit Stake with a criminal lawsuit but somehow can’t do the same to Roobet? 🤡 Lmao, what are you even on, lil bro?

This just proves my point that you, like many others (looking at you, AHOYABROUSE), didn’t actually read through the whole post—neither this one nor the other one about Stake.

Now, let’s talk about the actual issue.

Why aren’t you addressing any of my actual allegations?

❓ Why did Roobet claim they were legally allowed to operate in Switzerland?
❓ Where is their Swiss license proving that?
❓ If they don’t have a license, why did they lie to me?
❓ Why does Roobet accept Swiss players and even allow Swiss documents for KYC verification?

This isn’t just about me. This is about Roobet blatantly violating Swiss law and profiting from it.

Stake at least tried to cover their ass—Roobet? Not so much.

Stake legally distanced themselves from Swiss players (probably after their lawsuit) according to their Switzerland Customer Policy dated 01.01.2023. They assured the ESBK that from that date forward, Swiss players would be completely blocked from registering, wagering, and verifying their accounts.

Like I already pointed out in my Stake post, this still leaves a question unanswered:

❓ Why wasn’t my account blocked as of 01.01.2023 given the KYC1-Details from Switzerland?

My evidence has already been sent to the ESBK, and I'm waiting for their response. But regardless of what happens there, Roobet is still completely exposed because they didn’t even bother trying to comply with Swiss law.

If you still think there’s no legal ground for this, just stop contributing to this post. Seriously.

I appreciate any actual discussion, but if you don’t know what you’re talking about, then don’t act like you do.

And if you think you do know, then back it up with real proof—not just your personal opinion. Thanks.

[edondoko]

Roobet provided me with account documents in response to my GDPR request.

Here’s proof that my details are identical on both accounts:

First Account (CSV from Roobet's email): https://ibb.co/1Y0HzkB8

Second Account (Screenshot from when the account was still active): https://ibb.co/Q31qhjPZ

[Shishir99]

SNIP

A casino cannot obtain a license from all over the world. I believe most countries have a gambling regulatory authority if gambling is legal in that country. Is is their job to contact the casino and let them know to obtain the license. If a casino do not obtain it, the country's law should block that casino so people from that country cannot access that website anymore.

How many cases did you see against casinos for operating illegally in some specific region? Especially when it comes to online casinos. An online platform is worldwide. Everyone from every country can access the website unless there is some regulations. So, it is your country that allowed you to play or it is you who violated the rules by playing there.

[holydarkness]

[...]
Holydarkness should chime in and send this thread to his contacts. Maybe I’ll get an actual reply from Roobet—or at least from him—about their final answer. This isn’t just for my clarification, but for everyone else to understand why the casino let this screw-up happen. I want an answer as to why it happened and what they’re going to do about it.[...]

Holydarkness what?

I believe that "should" in your sentence refers to a polite request, like "I will appreciate holydarkness's insight and attempt to reach Roobet" instead of a demand like, "holydarkness have to reach Roobet to address my issue"?

Hey, I get it! Sorry if I came off a bit harsh with my request. My intention was more of a polite push for you to share your insight and maybe reach out to Roobet, rather than making it sound like a demand. I’m just trying to understand things better, and I appreciate any help.

By the way, my English isn’t perfect either—I’m using AI to translate my responses from german, and sometimes it might mess with the logic or grammar a bit. Thanks for your patience!

to what extent, if I may ask? Given, if I understand correctly, they've been made aware of the situation and their stance is quite clear? Unless I understand it wrongly? You offered them an 80% refund and an NDA, so suffice to say they're aware of this situation?

[nutildah]

Oh man, you really don’t know what you’re talking about, do you? Let me break it down real slow for you.

It doesn't matter how you break it down: the fact is Switzerland will not take any action against Roobet. That's just not what they do. No matter how you twist whatever legal statutes in your favor, its not happening.

📌 Article about Stake Lawsuit:

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-made/f1-sauber-cleared-of-unauthorized-advertising-rules-swiss-commission/79738912#:~:text=The%20SFGB%20therefore%20initiated%20an,should%20generally%20be%20considered%20advertising

C'mon man. This is the first sentence of your article:

The Sauber Formula 1 racing team is not engaging in unauthorised advertising for online gambling that is not licensed in Switzerland.

Its not even an investigation into Stake, its an investigation into an F1 team.

So they had enough influence to hit Stake with a criminal lawsuit but somehow can’t do the same to Roobet? 🤡 Lmao, what are you even on, lil bro?

Its not a "criminal lawsuit" or any type of lawsuit. It was an investigation that concluded in the favor of the F1 team. You're basically now just spinning up lies to help your "case," which is nonexistent.

If you still think there’s no legal ground for this, just stop contributing to this post. Seriously.

If I see you trying to get away with telling lies, I'm gonna call them out.

This whole thing is entirely ridiculous because there's no way you'd be crying about this if you had won. You're only here because you lost.

You offered them an 80% refund and an NDA, so suffice to say they're aware of this situation?

I'm trying to understand how this isn't just another example of a sore loser attempting to extort an online casino.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

You offered them an 80% refund and an NDA, so suffice to say they're aware of this situation?

I'm trying to understand how this isn't just another example of a sore loser attempting to extort an online casino.

Just laughable. This guy is so broke, he goes to all lengths to somehow get his money back. Also posting back to back to back to back is against forum rules.
Anyway, another entertaining thread, as usual from people like him. What's also interesting is the fact that he has the same nonsense writing style as blackyjacky and the other forum cancer spam clown, just this one supposedly is Swiss.  Also this time he is not complaining about house edge but jurisdictions, hahaha. Just another clown giving us some good laughs, thanks for that.

[edondoko]

[...]
Holydarkness should chime in and send this thread to his contacts. Maybe I’ll get an actual reply from Roobet—or at least from him—about their final answer. This isn’t just for my clarification, but for everyone else to understand why the casino let this screw-up happen. I want an answer as to why it happened and what they’re going to do about it.[...]

Holydarkness what?

I believe that "should" in your sentence refers to a polite request, like "I will appreciate holydarkness's insight and attempt to reach Roobet" instead of a demand like, "holydarkness have to reach Roobet to address my issue"?

Hey, I get it! Sorry if I came off a bit harsh with my request. My intention was more of a polite push for you to share your insight and maybe reach out to Roobet, rather than making it sound like a demand. I’m just trying to understand things better, and I appreciate any help.

By the way, my English isn’t perfect either—I’m using AI to translate my responses from german, and sometimes it might mess with the logic or grammar a bit. Thanks for your patience!

to what extent, if I may ask? Given, if I understand correctly, they've been made aware of the situation and their stance is quite clear? Unless I understand it wrongly? You offered them an 80% refund and an NDA, so suffice to say they're aware of this situation?

Every single response I’ve gotten from Roobet has been nothing but protocol answers that don’t acknowledge my actual claims. Most responses completely avoid my allegations, redirect me to another email, and when I follow up with that email, it’s just redirect after redirect.

At no point have they actually taken this case seriously or given a answer as to why it happened

That’s why, @holydarkness, I asked if you could have your contacts take a real look at this situation. I want someone to actually look over this and I'm probably not the only one.

And let’s leave the refund discussion aside for a second—because even without that, there are way too many unanswered questions.

Here’s one of them:

I might send Roobet an email asking how it was possible that my first account got self-excluded just because I "mentioned" gambling problems in live support chat—
BUT my second account, with the exact same 8-letter name and identical KYC details, was left completely open for me to continue to play and lose a lot more.

By their own Terms of Service, that shouldn’t have happened.

So tell me, how do they explain this? Because in my opinion, that alone is a breach of their own rules.

I already said I’d take an 80% refund on net losses for my accounts and sign an NDA to never talk about this again. I would be willing if they offered me atleast the net-losses on the second account.
That’s a win-win for them, because they’d still keep everything from my first account (25-40k in losses, I don't know the exact losses).

But whether or not they accept it, they still "owe" me and others an actual response as to how and why this mess even happened in the first place.

I know I’m not the only one who wants answers.

--

Now, a final note for @nutildah and @ahoybrause:

I’m done replying to either of you. You’ve already made up your minds and clearly have zero interest in looking at this case objectively.

You can keep running in circles, finding ways to insult me instead of questioning the casino, but it’s not gonna change the facts.

I’m here to expose what Roobet actually did. You’re here to act like clowns.

So yeah, enjoy the circus. I won’t be part of it.

[nutildah]

This is why Roobet will never give in to your demands:

https://roobet.com/terms-and-conditions


This is part of the terms & conditions you agreed to when registering your account.

It would have been worse if you made a lot of money and then your withdraw request was rejected on these grounds, but that's not what happened.

If any liability is to be found, it is on your ISP for allowing you to access Roobet, but this only applies if you weren't using a VPN to bypass restrictions (and I'm guessing you were using a VPN as you admitted you were with Stake).

So, like with your similar case with Stake, you'll need to hire a lawyer and file your own lawsuit if you truly want anything to be done. I doubt the Swiss government is going to intervene on your behalf:

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/various/illegal-online-casinos-on-the-rise-in-switzerland/87692154

Thomas Fritschi, Head of the Secretariat of the Federal Gaming Board, can’t say how many of these unlicensed online casinos actually exist.
...
Most providers of illegal online gambling originate from Gibraltar and Malta. The reason is that “the companies there operate legally. In other words, it’s a legal company, for example in Malta or Gibraltar, that has an online offering that also arrives in Switzerland,” said Fritschi. “It is illegal here. We block this site, but we can’t prosecute the perpetrators.”

Nevertheless, because I'm a nice guy, I've found a law firm that can help you get started with your lawsuit:

https://www.streichenberg.ch/en/articles/recovery-losses-illegal-online-casinos-switzerland

Good luck.

[edondoko]

This is why Roobet will never give in to your demands:

https://roobet.com/terms-and-conditions
https://talkimg.com/images/2025/03/30/lkwdm.png

This is part of the terms & conditions you agreed to when registering your account.

It would have been worse if you made a lot of money and then your withdraw request was rejected on these grounds, but that's not what happened.

If any liability is to be found, it is on your ISP for allowing you to access Roobet, but this only applies if you weren't using a VPN to bypass restrictions (and I'm guessing you were using a VPN as you admitted you were with Stake).

So, like with your similar case with Stake, you'll need to hire a lawyer and file your own lawsuit if you truly want anything to be done. I doubt the Swiss government is going to intervene on your behalf:

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/various/illegal-online-casinos-on-the-rise-in-switzerland/87692154

Thomas Fritschi, Head of the Secretariat of the Federal Gaming Board, can’t say how many of these unlicensed online casinos actually exist.
...
Most providers of illegal online gambling originate from Gibraltar and Malta. The reason is that “the companies there operate legally. In other words, it’s a legal company, for example in Malta or Gibraltar, that has an online offering that also arrives in Switzerland,” said Fritschi. “It is illegal here. We block this site, but we can’t prosecute the perpetrators.”

Nevertheless, because I'm a nice guy, I've found a law firm that can help you get started with your lawsuit:

https://www.streichenberg.ch/en/articles/recovery-losses-illegal-online-casinos-switzerland

Good luck.

I already said I wouldn’t be responding to you anymore, but since this reply finally is somekind of informative and actually acknowledges some legal aspects, I’ll clarify one last thing.

You keep insisting that the ESBK has no legal ground to act, but that’s simply not true.

Yes, the ESBK can’t directly prosecute Roobet’s owners since they’re outside Switzerland—but that doesn’t mean they can’t take action. What they can do is launch a criminal lawsuit against the company itself for violating Swiss gambling laws.

They’ve done it before (Stake’s case, for example, which you partially got right but still misunderstood), and they can do it again.

Let me explain why.

The investigation into Sauber wasn’t just about them—it was about their sponsor, Stake. The ESBK investigated whether Stake was actively advertising to Swiss users, and the conclusion was that they weren’t—thanks to their internal Switzerland Customer Policy, which they strictly followed from 01.01.2023. This is why the investigation led to nowhere.

I actually believe this because the ESBK themselves confirmed it to me via email.

Now, had the ESBK found proof that Stake was actively advertising to Swiss players, then Sauber would’ve been fined up to 500K. And after that? A criminal lawsuit would’ve followed against Stake for violating the Verwaltungsstrafrecht—because advertising and offering services to Swiss players without a license is illegal.

Roobet, on the other hand? Did none of that.

They verified me, assured me I was allowed, and took my money.
And now, when it suits them, they want to suddenly enforce their ToS?

So whether Roobet likes it or not, if I send my proof to the ESBK, they will investigate.
They have to. It’s literally part of their job.

Now, about their T&Cs—yes, I technically breached them.
But come on, bro, who actually reads all that fine print before registering? I saw forum ads for allowed casinos in Switzerland and Roobet themselves saying they were allowed—I trusted that. That’s on me, sure, but that doesn’t change the fact that Roobet lied.

Forget about my demands for a second—realistically, they probably won’t fulfill them anyway.
But that’s not the point.

The point is, this is still a massive screw-up by the casino, and they owe answers.

[holydarkness]

to what extent, if I may ask? Given, if I understand correctly, they've been made aware of the situation and their stance is quite clear? Unless I understand it wrongly? You offered them an 80% refund and an NDA, so suffice to say they're aware of this situation?

[...]
And let’s leave the refund discussion aside for a second—because even without that, there are way too many unanswered questions.

Here’s one of them:

I might send Roobet an email asking how it was possible that my first account got self-excluded just because I "mentioned" gambling problems in live support chat—
BUT my second account, with the exact same 8-letter name and identical KYC details, was left completely open for me to continue to play and lose a lot more.

By their own Terms of Service, that shouldn’t have happened.

So tell me, how do they explain this? Because in my opinion, that alone is a breach of their own rules.[...]

Did you mention the second account when you ask for the first account to be locked? Or at least reaching them with your second one, to inform them that this too is your account and needs to be closed too? That's a rhetorical question, no need to answer that. I read the opening post carefully.

Well, for that question above, I don't think I need to reach the to get an answer, because I think I have an answer for that, based from an explanation I got for past experience with an almost similar case, about one account excluded and others aren't, although this is from different casino.

Basically, self exclusion doesn't work like magic like when one username being placed into exclusion, all of the alt-accounts will automatically lit in the casino's radar and inter-connected and got excluded altogether. On the opposite, when someone have more than one account and one got excluded while others don't, and the player didn't mention the account to the casino, it actually has a potential of creating a conflicting problem where the exclusion for future account failed to "bite in".

Simplified, their database has two entries, which contradict each other. One said this IP [and/or other points they use to identify a player] should be banned due to self exclusion, yet according to the same database, the IP is good to go, as it was not locked. In fact, that IP just played a baccarat three seconds ago.

The last four sentences are an extra explanation. The answer to your question was the first sentence on paragraph three; without the player telling the casino that they have other accounts prior to submitting one for exclusion, above scenario can happen.

[nutildah]

Now, had the ESBK found proof that Stake was actively advertising to Swiss players, then Sauber would’ve been fined up to 500K. And after that? A criminal lawsuit would’ve followed against Stake for violating the Verwaltungsstrafrecht—because advertising and offering services to Swiss players without a license is illegal.

You initially said it was a "lawsuit against Stake." That was false. Now you are modifying your interpretation of the article to make it more aligned with the reality of the situation.

Roobet, on the other hand? Did none of that.

That's right -- they didn't. They also didn't advertise to Swiss players.

They verified me, assured me I was allowed, and took my money.
And now, when it suits them, they want to suddenly enforce their ToS?

You lost money so there is nothing for them to "enforce." They aren't withholding anything from you.

So whether Roobet likes it or not, if I send my proof to the ESBK, they will investigate.
They have to. It’s literally part of their job.

So do it then. You should also proceed with your first lawsuit against Stake. Right now it seems like you are just trying to extort money from Roobet.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

Now, a final note for @nutildah and @ahoybrause:

I’m done replying to either of you. You’ve already made up your minds and clearly have zero interest in looking at this case objectively.

You can keep running in circles, finding ways to insult me instead of questioning the casino, but it’s not gonna change the facts.

I’m here to expose what Roobet actually did. You’re here to act like clowns.

So yeah, enjoy the circus. I won’t be part of it.

We just see your nonsense for what it is. A desperate attempt to fix the mistake YOU made. Blackmailing and accusing casinos because YOU decided to play there and lose is not their fault. You are making up stories left and right, not only lying to the forum but also lying to yourself.

All that's left is basically: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Deg7VrpHbM&pp=ygUVc3RvcCBpdCBnZXQgc29tZSBoZWxw

Maybe the wise words of goat can open your eyes, get help and leave this forum.

[edondoko]

Okay, so based on both of you agreeing that I’m in the wrong and the casino is completely right, does that mean they should never have blocked my accounts? Am I understanding that correctly? Because from their perspective, they claim they’re allowed to offer services in Switzerland (what a joke, lol), so by that logic, shouldn’t I still have access to both of my accounts? Yet, they closed them. So what now?

Why did they close my first account when I never requested a self-exclusion?
I specifically asked if it was possible to block deposits and gambling on my account—without a self-exclusion—just making it withdraw-only. Not the same thing.

Why did they close my second account?
To this day, they haven’t provided a reason for the closure—and they probably never will. Why? Because according to ToS 6.4, they can close any account at their sole discretion.

So, even ignoring the whole licensing issue and the fact that I, as a Swiss player, technically wasn’t even supposed to be playing there—is this fair from the casino’s side?

While you say I have nothing to “collect” from Roobet, that’s just not true. The Vault, Weekly, and Monthly rewards on my first account alone would have totaled around $200 due to my losses. On my second account, it would’ve been around $20–50 in rewards. You might think it’s ridiculous to ask for that, but at the end of the day, it’s still money the casino just took from me.

I never asked for a self-exclusion or a full account ban—I even explicitly told them not to if it wasn’t possible. That’s exactly why I want a real Roobet representative to actually review the chat logs and tell me something different—or at the very least, explain on what basis my accounts were blocked.

Whether or not they fulfill my demands, this case still has far too many unanswered questions—and I fully intend to get them answered.

[holydarkness]

[...]

I never asked for a self-exclusion or a full account ban—I even explicitly told them not to if it wasn’t possible. That’s exactly why I want a real Roobet representative to actually review the chat logs and tell me something different—or at the very least, explain on what basis my accounts were blocked.

Whether or not they fulfill my demands, this case still has far too many unanswered questions—and I fully intend to get them answered.

Noted about this. Let me try to ask them to explain why and how what happened to your account, happened. Certainly they will not share the log with me, but hopefully they'll want to share the result of their internal investigation.

[edondoko]

[...]

I never asked for a self-exclusion or a full account ban—I even explicitly told them not to if it wasn’t possible. That’s exactly why I want a real Roobet representative to actually review the chat logs and tell me something different—or at the very least, explain on what basis my accounts were blocked.

Whether or not they fulfill my demands, this case still has far too many unanswered questions—and I fully intend to get them answered.

Noted about this. Let me try to ask them to explain why and how what happened to your account, happened. Certainly they will not share the log with me, but hopefully they'll want to share the result of their internal investigation.

Thank you very much!

[edondoko]

[...]

I never asked for a self-exclusion or a full account ban—I even explicitly told them not to if it wasn’t possible. That’s exactly why I want a real Roobet representative to actually review the chat logs and tell me something different—or at the very least, explain on what basis my accounts were blocked.

Whether or not they fulfill my demands, this case still has far too many unanswered questions—and I fully intend to get them answered.

Noted about this. Let me try to ask them to explain why and how what happened to your account, happened. Certainly they will not share the log with me, but hopefully they'll want to share the result of their internal investigation.

Any update?

[holydarkness]

[...]

I never asked for a self-exclusion or a full account ban—I even explicitly told them not to if it wasn’t possible. That’s exactly why I want a real Roobet representative to actually review the chat logs and tell me something different—or at the very least, explain on what basis my accounts were blocked.

Whether or not they fulfill my demands, this case still has far too many unanswered questions—and I fully intend to get them answered.

Noted about this. Let me try to ask them to explain why and how what happened to your account, happened. Certainly they will not share the log with me, but hopefully they'll want to share the result of their internal investigation.

Any update?

I have to be honest that at this point I lost track of [for not-so-reputable casino of which I don't have their direct contact] which casino is which and who and what, and who had the case against who, and who had I explained and who hadn't. But Roobet, I checked the last email with them, basically they requested every complainant to write to requests@roobet.com, as they can only discuss matters with the player, not me.

[edondoko]

[...]

I never asked for a self-exclusion or a full account ban—I even explicitly told them not to if it wasn’t possible. That’s exactly why I want a real Roobet representative to actually review the chat logs and tell me something different—or at the very least, explain on what basis my accounts were blocked.

Whether or not they fulfill my demands, this case still has far too many unanswered questions—and I fully intend to get them answered.

Noted about this. Let me try to ask them to explain why and how what happened to your account, happened. Certainly they will not share the log with me, but hopefully they'll want to share the result of their internal investigation.

Any update?

I have to be honest that at this point I lost track of [for not-so-reputable casino of which I don't have their direct contact] which casino is which and who and what, and who had the case against who, and who had I explained and who hadn't. But Roobet, I checked the last email with them, basically they requested every complainant to write to requests@roobet.com, as they can only discuss matters with the player, not me.

Thanks for your response. After reading it, I went ahead and emailed them at the address you mentioned.

It’s now been over two weeks without a single reply. That’s honestly unacceptable. At this point, it feels like they simply don’t care. I’m seriously considering reaching out to some larger YouTubers or streamers who might be able to bring broader public attention to this issue. If Roobet refuses to acknowledge me directly, then maybe exposure will push them to finally respond.

In the meantime, I’ll be contacting my lawyer to draft a formal letter as a last resort—either they respond, or we move forward with a civil lawsuit.

I’ll update this thread if I receive a response or mark it as resolved if the issue gets settled.