Baloo.bet Casino
Thank you for your response and for confirming that the player's account has now been closed.
I note that you have referred to your Terms and Conditions concerning account closure. However, having reviewed the relevant section on your website, it appears that the provision you quoted relates to general account closure. In this case, the player was not requesting a standard account closure but rather permanent self-exclusion due to gambling addiction, which requires a different and more urgent approach.
In line with accepted industry standards, as well as our Fair Gambling Codex, requests for self-exclusion based on gambling addiction should be treated with the highest priority and implemented without unnecessary delay. As a general rule, we consider up to three days to be a reasonable timeframe for a casino to process and enforce such a request.
Any delay beyond that exposes a vulnerable player to continued gambling activity and the risk of further losses, which is precisely what responsible gambling measures are intended to prevent. In our view, where a player continues to deposit and gamble because a self-exclusion request was not implemented within a reasonable period, the casino would have fallen short of player protection obligations.
Therefore, we advise casinos to consider refunding any deposits made by the player between their initial request for closure and the actual date their account was closed. I would like to propose this solution for your consideration in this particular situation. Thank you for your understanding and attention to this important matter.
Baloo.bet Casino
Thank you for your response and for confirming that the player's account has now been closed.
I note that you have referred to your Terms and Conditions concerning account closure. However, having reviewed the relevant section on your website, it appears that the provision you quoted relates to general account closure. In this case, the player was not requesting a standard account closure but rather permanent self-exclusion due to gambling addiction, which requires a different and more urgent approach.
In line with accepted industry standards, as well as our Fair Gambling Codex, requests for self-exclusion based on gambling addiction should be treated with the highest priority and implemented without unnecessary delay. As a general rule, we consider up to three days to be a reasonable timeframe for a casino to process and enforce such a request.
Any delay beyond that exposes a vulnerable player to continued gambling activity and the risk of further losses, which is precisely what responsible gambling measures are intended to prevent. In our view, where a player continues to deposit and gamble because a self-exclusion request was not implemented within a reasonable period, the casino would have fallen short of player protection obligations.
Therefore, we advise casinos to consider refunding any deposits made by the player between their initial request for closure and the actual date their account was closed. I would like to propose this solution for your consideration in this particular situation. Thank you for your understanding and attention to this important matter.