Is player protection fair to casinos or too much responsibility?

[Nrcewker]

Is this kind of rule really fair to the casino, or is it just part of the responsibility they accept when they operate in a strictly regulated market?

If a casino has included this rule in its Terms and Conditions, then it should be held responsible toward its gamblers. It needs to monitor the gambler’s actions and act accordingly. If it does not want to be held liable, then it should simply remove this rule from its Terms and Conditions.

Moreover, I have seen that these rules are strictly followed by physical casinos, as they are regularly inspected by the government to ensure that they comply with the relevant regulations and policies. However, if an online casino neglects this rule, then players have the right to file a complaint against it. Technically, the casino is not following what it has stated in its Terms of Service (ToS).

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Is this kind of rule really fair to the casino, or is it just part of the responsibility they accept when they operate in a strictly regulated market?

If a casino has included this rule in its Terms and Conditions, then it should be held responsible toward its gamblers. It needs to monitor the gambler’s actions and act accordingly. If it does not want to be held liable, then it should simply remove this rule from its Terms and Conditions.

Moreover, I have seen that these rules are strictly followed by physical casinos, as they are regularly inspected by the government to ensure that they comply with the relevant regulations and policies. However, if an online casino neglects this rule, then players have the right to file a complaint against it. Technically, the casino is not following what it has stated in its Terms of Service (ToS).

You are right, and I completely agree but I am still of the opinion that every sensible gambler should not leave the well being in terms of gambling to the casino, it is still our individual responsibility to take absolute care of our gambling habit because whether we like it or not, casinos are in this business to make money, and before any casino will step up to help stop you from loses assuming you can no longer control yourself, the casino will make sure you have lost more than enough money to them, and in the end, the gambler is the one who bears the grunt.

And talking about filing a complaint against the casino, how many gamblers can afford the financial cost and time required for filing a complaint?, one is that you are going to spend your hard earned money, two is that it's going to take your time, and this means is that you likely miss important appointments in your workplace or business to this effect, you will stressed and drained emotionally and mentally, and after all this, better win the case or else, all of this will be a waste.

[lovesmayfamilis]

I believe that it's part of the responsibility that they accepted during the time of regulation. But the fact is that, most casinos don't abide to the law and they allow gamblers to gamble recklessly because they want to make more money.

I believe that majority of gamblers don't know that they can sue a casino for this reason if not, some would have done it. Sometimes, the body in charge of monitoring the casinos that they abide to the strict regulations are only after their pockets. If the casino gives them fat envelopes, everything is going smoothly.

Great comment. Money decides everything. What amount, according to regulators, should force a casino to ban a player from playing? At the same time, how the player himself will look at it, observing that someone interferes with his rights and decides for him the right to choose. And here, of course, there will be double standards; if the casino shakes hands with regulators, putting some money in their pocket, then the casino will not limit players in the game for too much spending for a very long time.

[Japinat]

Great comment. Money decides everything. What amount, according to regulators, should force a casino to ban a player from playing? At the same time, how the player himself will look at it, observing that someone interferes with his rights and decides for him the right to choose. And here, of course, there will be double standards; if the casino shakes hands with regulators, putting some money in their pocket, then the casino will not limit players in the game for too much spending for a very long time.

That changes the story, the moment you talk about “corruption”, I presume that shaking hands already explains it.

Then whatever rules they make, those will never be implemented because regulators will just close their eyes since they already received money, and all they do is protect casinos rather than protect gamblers, which is supposed to be their job.

[Betwrong]

~ So if someone is gambling irresponsibly in that country, can they complain against the casino for not stopping them when they were clearly betting in a reckless way? Is this kind of rule really fair to the casino, or is it just part of the responsibility they accept when they operate in a strictly regulated market?

Just wondering, because this is a very different view of gambling compared to places where casinos mostly leave players on their own.

I remember playing slots on a site 10 years ago(it was a major site), and after losing more than $30 I got a warning saying that maybe I'm losing too much and I stopped. And that was actually very helpful because who knows how much more I would lose. I don't know how it's working these days because I never lose too much to slots in one session, but I hope all major sites have something like this implemented.

[xenomorfo]

I believe that it's part of the responsibility that they accepted during the time of regulation. But the fact is that, most casinos don't abide to the law and they allow gamblers to gamble recklessly because they want to make more money.

I believe that majority of gamblers don't know that they can sue a casino for this reason if not, some would have done it. Sometimes, the body in charge of monitoring the casinos that they abide to the strict regulations are only after their pockets. If the casino gives them fat envelopes, everything is going smoothly.

I didn't know this and this answer opens up a series of scenarios that I didn't think were possible.
I don't like laws very much, we should be the ones to punish casinos that don't behave well by simply not playing there anymore

Maybe it's a bit weaker as a solution compared to filing a lawsuit

[Rabata]

I don't like laws very much, we should be the ones to punish casinos that don't behave well by simply not playing there anymore

If casinos were properly managed by law, it would be beneficial for gamblers, but casinos do not follow any rules. They do not make any effort to control gamblers due to their greed for money. Especially the new casinos are more reckless. They only give more priority to their profits. They encourage gamblers in any way so that they keep them addicted to gambling. Even though the old and reputable casinos follow some rules but the new casinos are not care about that and that is why the losses of gamblers increase. Instead of expecting control and responsible gambling from any casino organization, one should try to control oneself.

[qwertyup23]

It is quite tricky though, because normally casinos would not want to stop a gambler who keeps betting, since they are also after profit. But in these regulated countries, there are actually laws that require them to protect players, not just take their money. So if someone is gambling irresponsibly in that country, can they complain against the casino for not stopping them when they were clearly betting in a reckless way? Is this kind of rule really fair to the casino, or is it just part of the responsibility they accept when they operate in a strictly regulated market?

Just wondering, because this is a very different view of gambling compared to places where casinos mostly leave players on their own.

Hmm this is an interesting problem.

This puts gambling companies at a huge disadvantage if they fail to self-exclude the players that they deemed to be addicted. On the other hand, however, gambling companies operate on risk- this means that the more people bet, the higher they would be at an advantage of profit.

While I always advocate responsible gambling, online gambling casinos do not have the responsibility to dictate or to be responsible for its players. They may employ self-exclusion settings but to blame them due to the irresponsibility of its players puts them at a great disadvantage to the point that it can prejudice their business.

It's like the government wants to destroy or remove gambling in a way that they're forcing the responsibility of its players to the casino owners themselves. In a way, they're "quasi"
removing the operations of online casinos on their country if this were the case.

[Cgrexp]

I believe that it's part of the responsibility that they accepted during the time of regulation. But the fact is that, most casinos don't abide to the law and they allow gamblers to gamble recklessly because they want to make more money.

I believe that majority of gamblers don't know that they can sue a casino for this reason if not, some would have done it. Sometimes, the body in charge of monitoring the casinos that they abide to the strict regulations are only after their pockets. If the casino gives them fat envelopes, everything is going smoothly.

Great comment. Money decides everything. What amount, according to regulators, should force a casino to ban a player from playing? At the same time, how the player himself will look at it, observing that someone interferes with his rights and decides for him the right to choose. And here, of course, there will be double standards; if the casino shakes hands with regulators, putting some money in their pocket, then the casino will not limit players in the game for too much spending for a very long time.

Control and setting limits are important. However, there is no specific limit for everyone that can be imposed on how much money they lose. A loss of $100 may be a big loss for one person, but for someone else, a loss of $500 is a big loss. Therefore, responsible gambling requires considering not only the amount of money but also one's own behavioral characteristics. Financial distress can later occur if someone plays for too long, takes out loans, or increases their bets to cover losses. Each player should strike a balance between their own freedom and loss prevention.