HomeForumComplaints DiscussionUnfair verdict- to players please seek a iot

Unfair verdict- to players please seek a iot

186 views 7 replies |
yesterday
|
Add post
yesterday

Yesterday, after five months, my complaint againts Heats Casino was closed and rejected following the casino’s submission of evidence alleging that I own multiple accounts. Their decision was based on "IP address, device environment, and user agent," as well as the timeline of KYC requests and the lack of response from a supposed secondary account.


This decision feels deeply unjust to me, because I am certain that I have never had any other accounts. I explained that the IP overlap could be due to the specific type of network operated by my internet provider, but I still do not understand what is meant by "device environment" and "user agent." As for the "timeline of KYC requests" and the "lack of response from the secondary account" being treated as proof that I created it—this sounds, frankly, absurd and unconvincing, in which way it showing that indeed I was creator of this second account ?


At the beginning of this process, I believed in your fairness and integrity. Now, however, I have come to the conclusion that the outcome could never have been different—that in such cases you consistently side with the casino, as you are part of the same industry. It operates like a vast machine, where your role is to attract new players, while its true purpose is not to provide enjoyment, but to drain people of their energy and, ultimately, everything else.


To anyone reading this: things will eventually change, and the true nature of this system will be exposed soon. For now, I urge you to seek other forms of entertainment. These people cooperating together and do not have your best interests at heart. Their AI-driven systems are designed to rip you off from much money as possible, pushing you further and further down, when you eventually somehow win they will use every ridiculous execuse to not pay you.


This post will likely be dismissed or removed as a desperate attempt to defend theirselves, delay the inevitable—but whatever is meant to happen will happen, regardless.

Pietres21
yesterday

We have no reason to delete your post, for sure.

Our complaint team has thoroughly investigated this case and unfortunately found out that there were duplicate accounts where the same IP was used, the same device system was used, and also identical information was submitted on both accounts, actually.

That is why your case was rejected from our side. In such cases, there is nothing much we can do.

22 hours ago

So evidence must be prepared as this operator is known for creativity. Whatever, i will move forward and never dont spend cent on any site, the true nature of things will begin to be seen as it really is, not as people are told to believe it is soon and our positions will be reversed. And why with so clear evidence it had to take 5 months to conclude It ? 🙂

Edited
18 hours ago
plus

How does linking online casino accounts work in practice?

I have a general question that came to my mind after some experiences.

How does it usually work in practice – are casinos actually able to uniquely link two accounts just based on things like IP address, device, or browser details?

Or are they rather treated as clues that only the combination of several elements can confirm something?

I'm asking out of curiosity, because from the outside it looks quite unclear, especially when someone uses, for example, mobile internet or a shared network.

I'm curious what it looks like in real situations, not just in theory.

Automatic translation:
Lukasz1819
6 hours ago

Hello, it is sadly rather general.

It more or less depends on the operator, its platform settings, and the concrete situation. From this perspective, for example, when a casino claims that a player registered more than one account just based on the same IP, it is not enough evidence for our mediators, and other patterns and matches need to be presented. To be honest, using the same concrete device under the same IP is very suspicious because, mostly in the rules, it is stated that a player is not allowed to share his account credentials and password.

Practically, since you mentioned a real situation, a concrete situation would be needed to describe the real matches and possible patterns on the same device or IP. 🙁

Pietres21
5 hours ago

Hello, it feels odd, doesn't it?

Actually, against all of those matches, there are not many possible and provable explanations that would allow the mediator to oppose the casino's perspective. When it comes to length, I was truly a hard one, and the majority of the time was spent on explaining and gathering all the matches of those accounts because, as I just described in my other post, mediators do not consider only the matched IP address and device as bulletproof. It took a huge amount of time, but sadly the casino provided far too many matches.

There is very little we can do to argue against the same details used on more than one account.

I'm also sorry it ended this way and I hope it was the last issue with multiple accounts you have.

Radka
5 hours ago
plus

Thank you for the explanation.

I understand that a combination of factors (not just IP address or device) is used to identify connections between accounts.

However, this is precisely what makes the situation difficult to understand from a player's perspective.

If there were indeed a lot of compliant data (such as personal or financial data) that most regulations would require to be accessible for security and compliance purposes, this raises a broader question:

How is it possible that the same user could create new accounts multiple times and continue to access the platform even though such links were available?

From the point of view of responsible gaming, this seems crucial – not only detecting connections after the fact, but above all effectively preventing re-access when such patterns are already identifiable.

I am not questioning the existence of the links themselves, but how they are used in practice in the context of player protection.

I am genuinely interested in how this is resolved in similar cases.

Automatic translation:
Lukasz1819
3 hours ago

I quite agree with you and I appreciate this opportunity to talk about it.

Many players submit complaints with us because they are not allowed to see proofs or were generally speaking not part of the actual investigation of their accounts. From a player's perspective, this is very rarely tolerated or understood. However, and here comes the most interesting part, since every situation is different and contextual proofs and similarities play a role, regulators do not provide a guidebook on how to resolve each and every scenario, which leaves casinos to apply their own approach. For example, we have to accept that players are not allowed to see concrete proofs, but we still try to find a fair resolution based on each and every concrete finding and context.

Thus, there is sadly no concrete answer to general questions, if you understand where I'm heading. Believe me, I'm trying to be completely honest here, and I still understand how it looks from players' points of view.

Add post

flash-message-reviews
User reviews – Write own casino reviews and share your experience
Trustpilot_flash_alt
What’s your opinion on Casino Guru? Share your feedback
Jelly express_push message3
Share your wins on Pragmatic Play slots, get another chance for winning with Casino Guru!

Follow us on social media – Daily posts, no deposit bonuses, new slots, and more