Ladbrokes Casino DE Review

The player from the United Kingdom had self-excluded from a casino in 2020. However, an agent from one of the casino's sister sites had later advised him to open a new account with Ladbrokes. Despite having been a known self-excluded customer, the player had been able to deposit approximately £750 within 2 hours. The player disputed this lack of player protection and asserted that any self-exclusion should have applied across all sites under the same group. The player had then sought a refund of all deposits made after the account closure and self-exclusion incidents. However, we found that the account had been closed in 2020 under normal circumstances, not due to self-exclusion. Also, there was no information indicating that self-exclusion from one casino would result in exclusion from others under the same owner. Therefore, the complaint had been rejected as we couldn't assist the player in obtaining refunds.

The player from the United Kingdom had been playing with Ladbrokes for 10 years and had won sizable amounts. However, his account was restricted and he was subsequently asked to verify it. Despite having provided multiple documents for account verification, his account balance was reset to zero and he was locked out of his account. The player had claimed that he was unable to provide further verification due to his disability. We had advised him to comply with the casino's verification process, but he did not respond within the given timeframe. Consequently, we were unable to further investigate and were forced to reject the complaint.

The UK-based player had expressed that her account at Ladbrokes had faced a verification issue, despite having been verified years ago with her German passport. Since the casino had not withheld any of the player's money, we could not proceed with the case or compel the casino to reopen the account. The player understood our position and appreciated our assistance.

The player from the United Kingdom is dissatisfied with the lack of enforcement regarding Responsible Gaming procedures. After a closer examination, we ended up rejecting this complaint as unjustified.