The player from Germany had an active self-exclusion in a similar casino due to a gambling problem. The player believes that they should have been banned from this casino too. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.
MyStake Casino - Player's asking for a deposit refund.
Amount: €1,380
MyStake Casino
Safety Index:Very highSafety Index
In line with our review methodology, we calculated the casino’s Safety Index based on more than 20 factors, including its financials, fairness of T&Cs, player complaints, and more. The higher the Safety Index, the more likely you are to receive your winnings without issues.
9.2
MyStake Casino has a Safety Index of 9.2, which makes it one of the safest casinos on the market. Explore this casino’s Safety Index
Case closed
Our verdict
Player stopped responding
REJECTED
Case summary
2 years ago
Public
Public
2 years ago
Translation
Mystake.com and Rolletto.com are one and the same company. They have the same postal address, the same license and so on, even if I open both websites and the chat at the same time, the chat is the same on both websites, i.e. if I write in the chat on Mystake, I see the same thing in the chat on Rolletto and vice versa. When I closed my account at Rolletto due to gambling addiction, I didn't know anything about Mystake. A few days later I registered at Mystake and played there for 3 weeks. When I lost 300 euros, I paid out 130 euros for the first and last time and then deposited a total of 1210 euros. A few days ago I was chatting with Mystake and also opened the Rolletto in a new window and suddenly I saw that my chat was running on both websites, then I realized that it was the same provider. I then informed Rolletto and Mystake that they should reimburse my losses at Mystake amounting to 1380 euros since the ban. Meanwhile, a ridiculous answer came and it is this: First of all, we would like to explain that we may work with partners to maximize our services, however, the disclosure and processing of personal data may take longer, so you will have to close the account for each other partner website separately apply for. Such a response is nothing but a shirk of responsibility. For example, when I blocked the account on one of N1's websites and they have 50 websites, 10 minutes later I couldn't register on any of N1's other websites. Furthermore, the excuse from Mystake and Rolletto is just ridiculous, because at the latest when I requested the payout, they knew that I had blocked myself because of my gambling addiction. You only paid out because you were in PLUS, if I had won 10,000 euros, for example, then they would certainly have refused the payout on the grounds that you allegedly only found out now that I had blocked the gambling addiction. Such action is a "legal" fraud and is not correct. If I block my account because of gambling addiction, then it is certainly not my job to find out which websites this provider has and to apply for the block on each individual website. There are 1000 casinos and I can't remember the names of the companies from these websites, if one day I open an account somewhere again, I don't have to remember that I have already closed my account with this company, that's what happens nor that they often change their names. That is the sole responsibility of the casino and only the casino itself MUST block all websites registered under your company name, my person and in my case I even had the identical nickname. So it is clear that I MUST be reimbursed for the losses since the gambling ban. Furthermore, this case also has the public interest, since one should prevent such an approach, at least those casinos that use such an excuse tactic may not have a good reputation, such an action is intentional. Because if one casino anywhere on your network can ban the player, then if the other casino makes the excuse that the player should have done the ban themselves everywhere, then such an answer can only be considered intentional fraud. Because if such behavior continues to be tolerated, it will lead to unlawful enrichment for these operators. And if the operator brings an explanation for itself that the player would have lost this money somewhere else, then we cannot agree to that, because this provider could just as well have been the last one where the player has not blocked himself until now and on top of that, the provider is not interested in whether the player would have lost the money somewhere else, there is also the possibility that the player might have lost it somewhere else. would have won. Conclusion: The money was received illegally and the losses since the blocking have to be reimbursed to the provider.
Automatic translation:
Public
Public
2 years ago
Dear L.J.,
Thank you very much for submitting your complaint. I’m sorry to hear about your problem. I have checked the Responsible gambling section, and this is what I found:
"Self-Exclusion
To assist our players in playing responsibly, we provide a selection of options:
Time out periods
Self-exclusion periods
24/7 Customer Support
Time Out Period
If you need a break from gambling, please contact our Customer Support team and ask them to temporarily close your account. The Account can be reopened prematurely in case of written request of the Player at Casino’s sole discretion.
Self-Exclusion
In case the situation is more serious, the Player may request the self-exclusion for an extended period. You shall contact our customer support team via email and request the self-exclusion for a period of between 6 months and 5 years. In case the User does not specify the period for the self-exclusion, the Account will be closed for 6 months.
It can be difficult to determine whether a person’s gambling has become problematic though. If you have gambling-related issues, please mention it while closing the account, so our staff will act responsibly. "
Unfortunately, there’s not written that all your accounts in other casinos of the same owner will be blocked or self-excluded automatically. Please understand that if you self-exclude yourself from one casino it doesn’t necessarily mean that you are protected on all the other associated websites.
Could you please advise if you have requested a self-exclusion from
MyStake Casino directly before you deposited?
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Best regards,
Kristina
Public
Public
2 years ago
Translation
Dear Kristina, thank you for the quick response.
They say the following: "Unfortunately, it is not written that all your accounts in other casinos of the same owner will be automatically blocked or self-excluded."
That's right, it also says nothing about the fact that I have to do the blocking on other websites myself.
When I banned my account at Rolletto.com (rolletto.com-Santeda, mystake.com-Santeda), I mentioned several times that I want to ban because of gambling addiction (chat confirmed) and got banned within 1 minute.
However, the T&Cs state the following: However, it can be difficult to determine if a person's gambling has become problematic. If you have gambling-related issues, please mention it when closing the account so our staff can act responsibly . "
Since I myself have stated that I am addicted to gambling , " acting responsibly " also means that I must also be excluded from other Santeda (mystake.com) websites. Add to that the fact that Santeda only has 2 websites (rolletto.com and mystake.com), so it wasn't a problem at all to block both sites at the same time. Through my pictures you have seen that the live chat is displayed on both websites at the same time, you can write where you want, the same is displayed in both chat windows, you can also check it yourself. Thus, this means that both websites are connected and knowledgeable about the gambling addiction ban.
However, I was able to open an account at Santeda - Mystake.com without knowing that you belong to rolletto.com. I registered with identical data, even with the same nickname: justuskab. The casino can't claim that you didn't know, because at the latest when you paid me the money, they did. Kristina, as you know, every casino looks closely for problems before they pay out the money for the first time. I can assure you that if I had won a higher amount then the money would certainly not have been paid out on the grounds that you allegedly only discovered the ban now.
I have now looked at various complaints about Mystake.com (Santeda) on your website. There are many cases where the casino does not pay out the money for higher sums on the grounds that the account has to be verified first and at the same time they state that the verification can take up to 6 months. This leaves no doubt that this casino intentionally makes such statements in order for the player to lose their money and that has probably always worked. They always closed such complaints because the player always lost his money before the case could be settled and that's why the casino didn't get a bad mark. Just if a casino always pays out the money to the customers who have already lost more than they paid out (99% of the cases), then it doesn't mean that a casino has to have good reputation, one should take an overall picture regardless of the complaint closed or not, especially if the complaint was closed ONLY because the player has already lost their winnings.
Rolletto.com (Santeda) used to always give 50 free spins to players if the player gave a good rating on Trustpilot.de. You can check it yourself on trustpilot.de and you will see that trustpilot has already noticed it and made a note on your website.
Thus, the approach of Santeda (mystake.com and rolletto.com) is more than questionable and should be looked at closely.
Edited
Automatic translation:
Public
Public
2 years ago
Translation
Dear Casinoguru team, Surely you have a lot to do. However, I wonder if we need a week for each answer, then we won't be able to finish it this year. Would it be possible to expedite the case? LG L.J.
Edited by a Casino Guru admin
Automatic translation:
Public
Public
2 years ago
Thank you for your reply, L.J.. Please note that we have hundreds of complaints that are currently in progress. As much as we would like to reply to each of them immediately, we have no capacity to do so. Each involved party has 14 days (7+7 days) to respond.
I would like to emphasize again that just because these casinos operate on the same platform, it doesn't mean that you will be automatically self-excluded from all casinos using it. You could possibly expect treatment like this from casinos operating under the MGA license, but not Curaçao.
Since the Rolletto Casino's Responsible gambling terms do not specify that you will be blocked across the whole platform, our hands are tied. Moreover, as long as you did not request the self-exclusion from MyStake Casino directly, unfortunately, there is not much more we could do and we don't think you are entitled to a refund.
If you still have access to your MyStake account, I can only recommend that you request self-exclusion from this casino as well.
Please, let me know if there is anything else I could help you with, or if I have overlooked something, otherwise, I will be forced to close this complaint. Thank you for your understanding.
