Dear LeoVegas Casino,
It is very likely that information about not being a player in any online casino has nothing to do with GDPR and/or privacy policy, and it is not considered personal detail.
As for the mentioned rules - all of them (except for Bet365's one) cause a decrease in their ratings on casino.guru. If they used it unfairly against players, it would cause a higher decrease in their ratings. Bet365's rule above is not considered unfair, and I believe the difference between "will not contribute towards the wagering requirements" and "all winnings/funds confiscation and blocked account" is clear.
Casino.guru has a few thousand online casinos in its database. You stated 4 casinos that have such a rule in their Terms and Conditions, whereas not all of them are considered unfair. But, assessment of such a rule depends on the rule's wording, its application, and in this case - evidence.
We work with what we have. The data provided by the player was sent in a strange form and without the casino's cooperation, we are unable to verify it. On the other side, the casino is not able to substantiate its claims - so, for now, it is still just the casino's claims, unsupported by any evidence/data. The casino "cannot share sensitive information here", but basically, it has shared nothing at all yet.
Anyway, we are waiting for the player's reply and confirmation of submitting a complaint to eCOGRA.
Thank you for your understanding.
Dear sita1215g,
Please, see my previous post and answer my questions.
We are looking forward to hearing from you.
Dear LeoVegas Casino,
It is very likely that information about not being a player in any online casino has nothing to do with GDPR and/or privacy policy, and it is not considered personal detail.
As for the mentioned rules - all of them (except for Bet365's one) cause a decrease in their ratings on casino.guru. If they used it unfairly against players, it would cause a higher decrease in their ratings. Bet365's rule above is not considered unfair, and I believe the difference between "will not contribute towards the wagering requirements" and "all winnings/funds confiscation and blocked account" is clear.
Casino.guru has a few thousand online casinos in its database. You stated 4 casinos that have such a rule in their Terms and Conditions, whereas not all of them are considered unfair. But, assessment of such a rule depends on the rule's wording, its application, and in this case - evidence.
We work with what we have. The data provided by the player was sent in a strange form and without the casino's cooperation, we are unable to verify it. On the other side, the casino is not able to substantiate its claims - so, for now, it is still just the casino's claims, unsupported by any evidence/data. The casino "cannot share sensitive information here", but basically, it has shared nothing at all yet.
Anyway, we are waiting for the player's reply and confirmation of submitting a complaint to eCOGRA.
Thank you for your understanding.
Dear sita1215g,
Please, see my previous post and answer my questions.
We are looking forward to hearing from you.