Dear Barbora,
Thank you for your assistance.
However, I must strongly disagree with the position presented by SpinHub.
Simply referring to an ADR decision as "final and binding" does not address the core issue of this case.
At no point was I provided with a clear or specific explanation of why my submitted documents were considered insufficient or allegedly altered.
A decision without transparent reasoning is neither fair nor verifiable.
In any proper review process, conclusions must be supported by clear justification, especially when all provided evidence points in the opposite direction.
The utility bill I submitted is an official document issued by Magenta/T-Mobile, digitally signed, and independently verifiable.
Despite this, it was repeatedly rejected without any explanation.
Instead, I was accused of document manipulation, which is a serious allegation that was never substantiated.
Additionally, the bank document I later provided to the ADR, clearly confirming my name and address, was dismissed without meaningful consideration, and no further communication was provided afterward.
It is also concerning that AskGamblers rejected the complaint solely on the basis of the ADR decision, without independently reviewing the evidence provided.
Furthermore, at the time of that complaint, SpinHub was not listed on Casino.Guru, meaning there was no independent review from your platform at that stage.
At this point, I am not questioning the existence of a decision; I am questioning the lack of reasoning behind it. A process that rejects verifiable documents without explanation and relies purely on authority rather than evidence cannot be considered fair or transparent.
I kindly request a thorough review of the submitted documents and a clear explanation of which specific requirement has not been met.
Kind regards,
Matthias
Dear Barbora,
Thank you for your assistance.
However, I must strongly disagree with the position presented by SpinHub.
Simply referring to an ADR decision as "final and binding" does not address the core issue of this case.
At no point was I provided with a clear or specific explanation of why my submitted documents were considered insufficient or allegedly altered.
A decision without transparent reasoning is neither fair nor verifiable.
In any proper review process, conclusions must be supported by clear justification, especially when all provided evidence points in the opposite direction.
The utility bill I submitted is an official document issued by Magenta/T-Mobile, digitally signed, and independently verifiable.
Despite this, it was repeatedly rejected without any explanation.
Instead, I was accused of document manipulation, which is a serious allegation that was never substantiated.
Additionally, the bank document I later provided to the ADR, clearly confirming my name and address, was dismissed without meaningful consideration, and no further communication was provided afterward.
It is also concerning that AskGamblers rejected the complaint solely on the basis of the ADR decision, without independently reviewing the evidence provided.
Furthermore, at the time of that complaint, SpinHub was not listed on Casino.Guru, meaning there was no independent review from your platform at that stage.
At this point, I am not questioning the existence of a decision; I am questioning the lack of reasoning behind it. A process that rejects verifiable documents without explanation and relies purely on authority rather than evidence cannot be considered fair or transparent.
I kindly request a thorough review of the submitted documents and a clear explanation of which specific requirement has not been met.
Kind regards,
Matthias