The player from Portugal had self-excluded from a casino but later allegedly deposited 0.931 BTC. The casino had subsequently closed his account and kept his deposited funds, and was not responding to his attempts to make contact. The player had provided evidence of the deposit, which he had made an hour after requesting self-exclusion. However, the casino had provided evidence suggesting no such transaction had occurred. We reviewed the evidence and found it to be in favor of the casino. Therefore, we had to reject the player's complaint. The player had been advised to contact the casino's gaming authority for further assistance.