Later this day i send this to both chat and email
Dear GambleZen Complaints Department.
I am submitting this formal complaint regarding your failure to protect me as a vulnerable player despite being repeatedly informed about my severe gambling addiction and my immediate risk of losing my winnings.
After winning €4,303.54, I contacted your support on several occasions before the funds were lost. I explicitly informed you that I suffer from a serious gambling problem and that I would not be able to control my gambling if the funds remained available in my account.
In my emails I clearly stated:
"I have gaming problem, so I really need you to help protect me from losing the money on my account until they have been withdrawn."
"I need you to withdraw my total amount in one transaction. I can’t make withdrawals every 24 hours because I am going to lose the money then."
"I can’t handle my gaming and will lose all money if you don’t."
I also requested specific responsible gambling measures, including:
Removing my ability to cancel pending withdrawals;
Applying a €1 loss limit;
Protecting my remaining balance until all withdrawals had been completed;
Closing my account once all withdrawals had been paid.
Your support acknowledged that the responsible gambling tools I requested, including withdrawal protection and loss limits, were unavailable because they were still being finalized and tested. Despite having actual knowledge of my gambling disorder and the immediate risk I described, you did not implement any alternative protective measures. At the same time, you maintained a withdrawal limit of €500 per day, leaving the majority of my winnings accessible for gambling over several days.
The exact outcome that I warned you about occurred. Because my requests for protection were refused and my winnings remained available, I lost the entire remaining balance.
SUMMARY OF POLICY BREACHES – GAMBLEZEN RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING NON-COMPLIANCE
Failure to provide Cooling-Off functionality (Mandatory Requirement Breach)
The operator explicitly references that a Cooling-Off option must be available to players as part of its responsible gambling obligations.
However, despite this stated requirement, the operator does not provide any clearly defined, accessible, or functional cooling-off mechanism within its Terms, Responsible Gambling framework, or operational descriptions.
The only harm prevention tool described is self-exclusion, which is materially different in scope and function. Self-exclusion is a long-term or permanent restriction, whereas cooling-off is a mandatory short-term intervention tool intended to allow players to pause gambling activity temporarily without full account closure.
The absence of a cooling-off tool constitutes a direct failure to implement a mandatory responsible gambling safeguard, meaning the operator is not compliant with its own stated RG control framework.
Insufficient Responsible Gambling accessibility and enforcement
The operator claims that responsible gambling information and addiction support must be prominently displayed. However:
No assurance of consistent prominence across all user interfaces
No verification of multilingual accessibility enforcement
No UI compliance standard is defined
This results in partial and unverified compliance with accessibility obligations.
CONCLUSION
The operator’s Responsible Gambling framework contains multiple mandatory requirements that are either:
Not implemented (Cooling-Off functionality)
Only partially implemented (Self-Exclusion controls)
Not demonstrably operational (Behaviour tracking, staff training, marketing safeguards)
Most significantly, the absence of a Cooling-Off tool represents a direct breach of a stated mandatory requirement, creating a material gap in player protection controls.
I consider this a serious failure to meet your responsible gambling obligations. I warned you in advance, explained exactly what would happen, requested reasonable protective measures, and made it clear that my intention was to withdraw my winnings and permanently close my account.
After you informed me that withdrawal protection and loss limit were unavailable, I immediately proposed a reasonable alternative. I requested that my entire balance be paid out in a single transaction because your daily withdrawal limit of €500 left the remaining funds exposed.
I explicitly warned you:
"I need you to withdraw my total amount in one transaction. I can’t make parts of withdrawal every 24 hours because I am going to lose the money then."
Despite this clear warning, no alternative protection was provided and the daily withdrawal limit remained in place. The foreseeable consequence was that my winnings remained accessible for gambling, resulting in the exact loss that I had repeatedly warned you about.
I therefore hold GambleZen responsible for the loss of my winnings and request compensation in the amount of €2,803.54. As you already has confirm.
Later this day i send this to both chat and email
Dear GambleZen Complaints Department.
I am submitting this formal complaint regarding your failure to protect me as a vulnerable player despite being repeatedly informed about my severe gambling addiction and my immediate risk of losing my winnings.
After winning €4,303.54, I contacted your support on several occasions before the funds were lost. I explicitly informed you that I suffer from a serious gambling problem and that I would not be able to control my gambling if the funds remained available in my account.
In my emails I clearly stated:
"I have gaming problem, so I really need you to help protect me from losing the money on my account until they have been withdrawn."
"I need you to withdraw my total amount in one transaction. I can’t make withdrawals every 24 hours because I am going to lose the money then."
"I can’t handle my gaming and will lose all money if you don’t."
I also requested specific responsible gambling measures, including:
Removing my ability to cancel pending withdrawals;
Applying a €1 loss limit;
Protecting my remaining balance until all withdrawals had been completed;
Closing my account once all withdrawals had been paid.
Your support acknowledged that the responsible gambling tools I requested, including withdrawal protection and loss limits, were unavailable because they were still being finalized and tested. Despite having actual knowledge of my gambling disorder and the immediate risk I described, you did not implement any alternative protective measures. At the same time, you maintained a withdrawal limit of €500 per day, leaving the majority of my winnings accessible for gambling over several days.
The exact outcome that I warned you about occurred. Because my requests for protection were refused and my winnings remained available, I lost the entire remaining balance.
SUMMARY OF POLICY BREACHES – GAMBLEZEN RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING NON-COMPLIANCE
Failure to provide Cooling-Off functionality (Mandatory Requirement Breach)
The operator explicitly references that a Cooling-Off option must be available to players as part of its responsible gambling obligations.
However, despite this stated requirement, the operator does not provide any clearly defined, accessible, or functional cooling-off mechanism within its Terms, Responsible Gambling framework, or operational descriptions.
The only harm prevention tool described is self-exclusion, which is materially different in scope and function. Self-exclusion is a long-term or permanent restriction, whereas cooling-off is a mandatory short-term intervention tool intended to allow players to pause gambling activity temporarily without full account closure.
The absence of a cooling-off tool constitutes a direct failure to implement a mandatory responsible gambling safeguard, meaning the operator is not compliant with its own stated RG control framework.
Insufficient Responsible Gambling accessibility and enforcement
The operator claims that responsible gambling information and addiction support must be prominently displayed. However:
No assurance of consistent prominence across all user interfaces
No verification of multilingual accessibility enforcement
No UI compliance standard is defined
This results in partial and unverified compliance with accessibility obligations.
CONCLUSION
The operator’s Responsible Gambling framework contains multiple mandatory requirements that are either:
Not implemented (Cooling-Off functionality)
Only partially implemented (Self-Exclusion controls)
Not demonstrably operational (Behaviour tracking, staff training, marketing safeguards)
Most significantly, the absence of a Cooling-Off tool represents a direct breach of a stated mandatory requirement, creating a material gap in player protection controls.
I consider this a serious failure to meet your responsible gambling obligations. I warned you in advance, explained exactly what would happen, requested reasonable protective measures, and made it clear that my intention was to withdraw my winnings and permanently close my account.
After you informed me that withdrawal protection and loss limit were unavailable, I immediately proposed a reasonable alternative. I requested that my entire balance be paid out in a single transaction because your daily withdrawal limit of €500 left the remaining funds exposed.
I explicitly warned you:
"I need you to withdraw my total amount in one transaction. I can’t make parts of withdrawal every 24 hours because I am going to lose the money then."
Despite this clear warning, no alternative protection was provided and the daily withdrawal limit remained in place. The foreseeable consequence was that my winnings remained accessible for gambling, resulting in the exact loss that I had repeatedly warned you about.
I therefore hold GambleZen responsible for the loss of my winnings and request compensation in the amount of €2,803.54. As you already has confirm.