BITZ.io Casino - Interesting Process "Required" for Blocking a Casino Account

[ptaylor78]

I’m curious whether anyone here has seen anything like this before.

In the attached screenshot, I informed a casino that I am a resident of a restricted country under their own TOS and asked for my account to be blocked on that basis. The response was that the account could only be blocked after a seven-day self-exclusion period, after a self-exclusion tool “under maintenance” was completed, and only after I then sent a separate email requesting the block.

Has anyone encountered a process where an ineligible player must first complete self-exclusion and then separately request account blocking before a casino enforces its own territory restriction policy?

It feels counter-intuitive. One would expect a casino to block an ineligible account on its own initiative once residency in a restricted country is disclosed. Interested to hear whether others have seen similar practices or if this is an outlier.

[freedomgo]

I think the real point here is that you already knew you weren’t allowed, but you still chose to gamble anyway. Now it feels like you’re asking the casino to block your account immediately, like you’re in a rush for it to happen.

From the casino side, it’s pretty normal that they don’t catch these things right away. Sometimes they let players play first, then later they discover, or finally act on the fact, that the user is from a restricted country and that’s when they block the account.

Either way, we also have responsibility here. We’re not minors. We shouldn’t just push everything to the casino. Their action might not be instant, but sooner or later, they will enforce their TOS.

[ptaylor78]

I think the real point here is that you already knew you weren’t allowed, but you still chose to gamble anyway. Now it feels like you’re asking the casino to block your account immediately, like you’re in a rush for it to happen.

From the casino side, it’s pretty normal that they don’t catch these things right away. Sometimes they let players play first, then later they discover, or finally act on the fact, that the user is from a restricted country and that’s when they block the account.

Either way, we also have responsibility here. We’re not minors. We shouldn’t just push everything to the casino. Their action might not be instant, but sooner or later, they will enforce their TOS.

Unfortunately your assumption is wrong.  No deposits or bets were made when that conversation took place.  Any other theories you would like to float?

I don't really understand you comments about casino catching after the fact in situations where player admits the ineligibility. Could you elaborate?

[Odusko]

How did you create your account in the first place when you are from a restricted region, you must have used VPN I guess now if you did, it then means to the casino the account is considered valid unless and untill you apply for self exclusions, the reason casinos give you time before enforcing self exclusions is because self exclusions in individual triggered which means the casino can not verify who is on the other side sending the request there for there is need for the application to under go some important verification and waiting period before the account can be closed.

[acroman08]

Usually they just(or should) block the account if they found out the gambler who created the account is from a restricted country.

Is this conversation via chat in their casino using your account? because their reply to you on 7:37 feels like you requested a self exclusion for seven days and they are saying that the account will be permanenly blocked after that, but I could be totatly wrong.

Would you mind putting all the conversations you've had with their support?

[ptaylor78]

How did you create your account in the first place when you are from a restricted region, you must have used VPN I guess now if you did, it then means to the casino the account is considered valid unless and untill you apply for self exclusions, the reason casinos give you time before enforcing self exclusions is because self exclusions in individual triggered which means the casino can not verify who is on the other side sending the request there for there is need for the application to under go some important verification and waiting period before the account can be closed.

Or maybe they don't enforce their TOS and just let anyone play and the self-exclusion requirement was just a delay tactic?

[ptaylor78]

Usually they just(or should) block the account if they found out the gambler who created the account is from a restricted country.

Is this conversation via chat in their casino using your account? because their reply to you on 7:37 feels like you requested a self exclusion for seven days and they are saying that the account will be permanenly blocked after that, but I could be totatly wrong.

Would you mind putting all the conversations you've had with their support?

Will do.  I have to step away for about 90 minutes for IRL tasks, but will be sure to when I return.

[freedomgo]

I don't really understand you comments about casino catching after the fact in situations where player admits the ineligibility. Could you elaborate?

My point is, you already contacted support and even showed the conversation to us as a proof, and from what I see, you were basically asking them to block your account because you told them you’re playing from the US where it’s restricted. So I’m honestly curious, why create the account in the first place if you were just going to ask for it to be blocked later? Were you just testing them or playing around?

Second, I assumed you were already playing, especially since you mentioned self-exclusion. That feature usually comes up when someone is already gambling and feels the need to stop. So the scenario I’m seeing, and this is just my assumption, is that you were already gambling, the casino allowed it because they didn’t know you were from a restricted country, then after losing, you decided to self-exclude and brought up the restriction issue. Now it kind of looks like you’re blaming them for letting you play in the first place.

Again, just asking if this assumption is valid.

[ptaylor78]

I don't really understand you comments about casino catching after the fact in situations where player admits the ineligibility. Could you elaborate?

My point is, you already contacted support and even showed the conversation to us as a proof, and from what I see, you were basically asking them to block your account because you told them you’re playing from the US where it’s restricted. So I’m honestly curious, why create the account in the first place if you were just going to ask for it to be blocked later? Were you just testing them or playing around?

Second, I assumed you were already playing, especially since you mentioned self-exclusion. That feature usually comes up when someone is already gambling and feels the need to stop. So the scenario I’m seeing, and this is just my assumption, is that you were already gambling, the casino allowed it because they didn’t know you were from a restricted country, then after losing, you decided to self-exclude and brought up the restriction issue. Now it kind of looks like you’re blaming them for letting you play in the first place.

Again, just asking if this assumption is valid.

The question was whether after a player admits he is from a restricted country, if it is standard for a casino to reply that player needs to use an "under maintenance" currently unavailable tool to self exclude for 7 days and then following that 7 day period, the player should send a message requesting a block of his ineligible account.  Perhaps you could do me a favor of answering my question first in the threat before compelling me to answer your theories and assumptions.

[aioc]

How did you create your account in the first place when you are from a restricted region, you must have used VPN I guess now if you did, it then means to the casino the account is considered valid unless and untill you apply for self exclusions, the reason casinos give you time before enforcing self exclusions is because self exclusions in individual triggered which means the casino can not verify who is on the other side sending the request there for there is need for the application to under go some important verification and waiting period before the account can be closed.

Or maybe they don't enforce their TOS and just let anyone play and the self-exclusion requirement was just a delay tactic?

Some casinos do that; you are playing at your own risk if you know you are restricted, yet still register and bet. This is why you should read and understand the terms.
Every casino has a different way of addressing situations; it depends on its tracing system. Some casinos have features that prevent players from accessing the casino if the location they are in is blocked by the casino's system, and some casinos change their terms for blocking certain countries. Again, be responsible and read and understand the terms before joining and playing in casinos.

[Odogwu-Blockchain]

From the casino side, it’s pretty normal that they don’t catch these things right away. Sometimes they let players play first, then later they discover, or finally act on the fact, that the user is from a restricted country and that’s when they block the account.

This is the worst side from a gambling platform, for blocking a user after you find out such user hitted pretty good amount of money and then restrict his account for a verification checkup, after finding out that the fault is from the player for violating the regional rules and then the account get blocked without informing the player.

It's scary to see how some casino support works, now an instance is asked to block account while there is an excuse of self-exclusion requirements to be first met before blockage.

I don't trust such conditions at all, a simple going ahead to block should be done since the request is from the realest owner of the account, it's stressing.

[freedomgo]

The question was whether after a player admits he is from a restricted country, if it is standard for a casino to reply that player needs to use an "under maintenance" currently unavailable tool to self exclude for 7 days and then following that 7 day period, the player should send a message requesting a block of his ineligible account.  Perhaps you could do me a favor of answering my question first in the threat before compelling me to answer your theories and assumptions.

Honestly, it’s hard to answer this kind of question because very few of us can really relate to self-exclusion. When we gamble, we usually believe we can handle the losses. Self-exclusion feels more like something for addicted gamblers, and for most of us here, I think we’re responsible enough to manage ourselves.

Still, thanks for bringing this up, even if it’s not the first time this topic came out.

I’m just curious though, what are you really trying to achieve with this post?

[Cointxz]

I’m curious whether anyone here has seen anything like this before.

In the attached screenshot, I informed a casino that I am a resident of a restricted country under their own TOS and asked for my account to be blocked on that basis. The response was that the account could only be blocked after a seven-day self-exclusion period, after a self-exclusion tool “under maintenance” was completed, and only after I then sent a separate email requesting the block.

Has anyone encountered a process where an ineligible player must first complete self-exclusion and then separately request account blocking before a casino enforces its own territory restriction policy?

It feels counter-intuitive. One would expect a casino to block an ineligible account on its own initiative once residency in a restricted country is disclosed. Interested to hear whether others have seen similar practices or if this is an outlier.

I knew Stake and other casino that I play can automatically block a certain account if it’s violated the ToS. I requested before to block some of my old account that I didn’t use already while I created a knew one which they block immediately without the need to undergo self-exclusion.


I don’t see the point too on longer process of self-exclusion while your account is clear not eligible to deposit and use the casino due to ToS violation.

Maybe this casino support doesn’t have any option to manually block users so their self exclusion way is still a valid suggestion to permanently block account. It’s just the long procedure.

[Natalim]

It's scary to see how some casino support works, now an instance is asked to block account while there is an excuse of self-exclusion requirements to be first met before blockage.

I don't trust such conditions at all, a simple going ahead to block should be done since the request is from the realest owner of the account, it's stressing.

Bad support for sure, but the real question is, can we actually sue them for this kind of lapse? Let’s say no money was involved, or even if there was a loss, but the issue is that they knowingly allowed gamblers from a restricted country to access the site, and support clearly failed to interpret or explain their own TOS properly, even giving reckless answers.

In that situation, do we really have any legal ground, or is this just something casinos can get away with?

[Orpichukwu]

The question was whether after a player admits he is from a restricted country, if it is standard for a casino to reply that player needs to use an "under maintenance" currently unavailable tool to self exclude for 7 days and then following that 7 day period, the player should send a message requesting a block of his ineligible account.  Perhaps you could do me a favor of answering my question first in the threat before compelling me to answer your theories and assumptions.

I have not seen that type of banning policy for restricted countries before, nor have I seen any case where a user self-admitted to coming or playing from a restricted country, but the best way, which has always been used each time a casino detects that someone is violating their policy, is to lock the person's account first and then ask for clarification later and not to ask for self-exclusion before taking the account down.

[Miles2006]

From the casino side, it’s pretty normal that they don’t catch these things right away. Sometimes they let players play first, then later they discover, or finally act on the fact, that the user is from a restricted country and that’s when they block the account.

This is the worst side from a gambling platform, for blocking a user after you find out such user hitted pretty good amount of money and then restrict his account for a verification checkup, after finding out that the fault is from the player for violating the regional rules and then the account get blocked without informing the player.

Wondering how op got the account first without being caught, casinos don’t pay attention during the registration process since they feel anyone can register without making use of the casino. Casinos in general don’t joke with restriction that has to do with location except op used vpn while registering an account, I’m not aware about self exclusion first before getting account blocked definitely the self exclusion option is another way of ignoring the casino service and requesting for account ban is still not necessary.

[Floxynice]

The casino gave a very weak excuse for not blocking the account immediately. They are undergoing self exclusion maintenance? That's a very weak excuse. This is something the casino can do within the twinkle of an eye, but I just believe they are just putting up this delays just to conduct some form of verifications on the account and also, asking for self exclusion could also be their way of shifting the responsibilities to the gambler just to avoid any form of dispute that may arise in the future concerning that very account. The gambler knew right from the creation of the account that he was going against the ToS of the casino, coming out now to expose himself by himself is questionable.

[Sandra_hakeem]

I’m curious whether anyone here has seen anything like this before.

In the attached screenshot, I informed a casino that I am a resident of a restricted country under their own TOS and asked for my account to be blocked on that basis. The response was that the account could only be blocked after a seven-day self-exclusion period, after a self-exclusion tool “under maintenance” was completed, and only after I then sent a separate email requesting the block.

Has anyone encountered a process where an ineligible player must first complete self-exclusion and then separately request account blocking before a casino enforces its own territory restriction policy?

It feels counter-intuitive. One would expect a casino to block an ineligible account on its own initiative once residency in a restricted country is disclosed. Interested to hear whether others have seen similar practices or if this is an outlier.

I think this is a very interesting topic.
You registered under a casino that has a rule of restriction on ineligible users from certain residency, and somehow, never got caught after this whole time. Now you turned yourself in and they still never saw anything wrong in breaking the rules, instead they gave you an ultimatum (which is normal) with hopes that you'd poke in within the week again so your ban request can be rejected. There are two things involved in this scenario: it's either you're a degenerate gambler with heavy stakes per game, or profile has a big dealership, or both.

[Russlenat]

The gambler knew right from the creation of the account that he was going against the ToS of the casino, coming out now to expose himself by himself is questionable.

This kind of exposure probably just calls attention to the casino that their system is weak, or at least not properly enforced, since players from restricted regions are still able to access the site. That said, if it’s a crypto casino, this is pretty common. Most of them don’t ask for KYC right away, so their usual defense would be that they didn’t know where the player was really from. But in the end, the TOS is still there. Restricted countries are clearly listed, and once a player agrees to it, the responsibility is on the player.

[danherbias07]

I am wondering how you got in if your country is restricted. Did you use any VPN?

Because in the first place, if the IP of the gambler is listed in the restricted countries, you cannot even access it, or there will be a prompt that you cannot register, and so on. I think what they are saying is that there are only certain games that are unavailable in your country. This contradicts the first rule. In other online casinos, some games are not allowed in my country, especially slot games. But it's not listed in restricted countries. It just doesn't allow me to play that certain game.

I think this is a very interesting topic.

Yeah, I agree this could be an interesting discussion, and I do hope some online casino owners could help us understand this.