Question Violation of self-exclusion across Santeda International BV brands (Velobet, Goldenbet, Cosmobet)

Hello everyone,

I need advice regarding violating self-exclusion and chargeback options. Here is my situation:

Self-exclusion: On June 19, 2026, I officially requested permanent self-exclusion due to severe gambling addiction on Velobet using my verified identity (KYC documents). My request was accepted and confirmed.

Violations by sister sites: Both Goldenbet and Cosmobet allowed me to register with my real details and deposit money, even though they are operated by the exact same parent company — Santeda International BV

Payment Masking: When checking bank statements at ČSOB, all card deposits were charged under completely unrelated third-party merchant names (e.g. nexgam3, creski3, arnggc, elegro.eu). The Compliance Officer at Goldenbet confirmed to me in writing that they use third-party processors with unknown descriptions.

Current status: Goldenbet Compliance rejected my refund request, claiming that each website operates independently.

Do Velobet, Goldenbet and Cosmobet legally fall under one operator (Santeda International BV) with a shared duty of care for self-excluded players?

Am I in a strong position to resolve this through Casino Guru / Curaçao GCB, or should I go straight to the bank chargeback route through ČSOB (Visa/Mastercard) based on operator error and masking of payments?

thank you in advance

Hi, I have to say the answer here is quite complicated, much like the issue of gambling addiction itself. I’m sorry to hear what you’re going through.

One thing to bear in mind is that chargebacks generally go against online casinos’ terms and conditions. Going down that route could mean having your accounts closed, potentially even at other reputable casinos. And that’s where the paradox comes in. Ideally, you wouldn’t gamble at all, of course, but unfortunately, it isn’t that simple for many people struggling with addiction.

Having accounts closed because of a chargeback might therefore sound like a benefit. My concern, though, is that if you end up gambling again, you could find yourself turning to riskier casinos, where gambling addiction and player protection may be taken less seriously. I wouldn’t assume that information about a chargeback will automatically be shared with other casinos, but it’s a potential consequence worth considering.

Another important point is that self-exclusion at one casino doesn’t necessarily mean exclusion across the whole group. The scope may depend on the applicable rules, the casinos’ self-exclusion policies, or what was specifically agreed with you. That’s why it helps to have the exact wording of your request and their confirmation saved, ideally as emails or screenshots.

We can go through the details together here on the forum if you’d like.

Hi. I have saved an email where I requested self-exclusion due to addiction. Since these casinos belong to one provider, they should prohibit me from applying for registration at all their casinos. Just check it out and as I already wrote. Velobet, Goldenbet and Cosmobet. Their operator is (Santeda International BV). This company must see all registered persons and if that person requests self-exclusion and writes that they are addicted, they must have set all their casinos that this person is addicted and can no longer bet and play slot machines. This way they can create new casinos every moment and we, who are addicted, will eventually pay for it with our lives. In our Czech Republic, I am on the register of excluded persons and I cannot register anywhere. Unfortunately, these corporations here only profit from addicted people. That is why I want Santeda International BV to return all the lost money. From the date I wrote the email to Velobet. I will provide a copy.

Here is the request for exclusion. And the response.

Hello, welcome back. I’d like to clarify something you mentioned. You seem to have expected your self-exclusion to apply to the other casinos because they’re operated by the same company. I understand why you would think that, but I wouldn’t assume it applies automatically across all sister casinos without checking the scope of the exclusion.

I can see that you requested permanent self-exclusion at VeloBet Casino and received confirmation that your account was closed. Did that confirmation mention whether the exclusion also covered any related casinos?

From your previous post, I understand you expected those casinos to prevent you from opening accounts as well. I think that’s the part we need to clarify: whether your exclusion covered VeloBet alone or the wider group.

I also understand that you’re registered in the Czech national self-exclusion scheme. However, these casinos don’t hold a Czech licence, so you shouldn’t assume that they participate in that scheme or are automatically notified of your exclusion.

I’m sorry, because I understand why you expected that protection to apply. Unfortunately, a single self-exclusion request doesn’t automatically cover every casino everywhere. National schemes and exclusions across an operator’s brands have a defined scope, so its beneficial to establish which casinos your requests actually covered.

To me, it seems that your main focus is on recovering your funds. I can’t promise that a complaint will lead to that outcome, but as you probably know by now, you’re welcome to submit one. Our complaint team will then review the specific circumstances I mentioned earlier.

That’s an option you can take, and it’s entirely up to you. I also sincerely hope you’re able to stay away from gambling.