dirtystack

Self exclusions normally have a customer specified duration attached to them, 1year, 2 years, 5 years, forever. It might be that you have opened another account while the self exclusion is still within its self exclusion period. I'm not sure if indefinitely means forever in this regard. I'd contact their live chat and ask what the duration of the self exclusion on your original account was, exactly when it was so you can figure out if you are still in the exclusion period, and get some clarification as to what indefinitely means in this regard. Whether it means excluded until reopened or excluded forever. 5 days isn't a great deal and 2 of those days would have been on the weekend - my experience is that casino staff in the back offices, legal, compliance, etc do not work weekends or unsociable hours. Way I see it, if they don't have a problem gambling/self exclusion issue then they should merge your accounts and allow you access - I have the same issue pop up where I work and it can take some time as I will need to investigate for any obvious reasons not to reinstate a customer - if I can't find anything then I have to contact a different department who has more information and see if they can find any reason not to reinstate - it's only after I have received confirmation that there is no issues that I can reinstate someone. It can take time. If they don't allow you access to your account due to some self exclusion period/problem gambling then they have an obligation to refund you the deposits you made with the new account. It should have flagged you as having an existing self excluded account when you registered the new account with the same name/details. The ADR is where you go if you have no joy after exhausting Casumo's own complaints procedure. You will need to get a bit more info, ask for an e-mail response detailing what exactly is happening with your account/s. Once you get that info from the relevant team, and if you are not happy with it you need to make a formal complaint to Casumo, an email headed 'formal complaint regarding ......' and stating that you 'expect a response within the time frame outlined in Casumo's complaints T&C.' It's normaly only once you have exhausted Casumo's in house procedures that an ADR will take on a complaint.

Couple of things: Have you tried logging into the new account and the old one? How many days has it been since you sent the email? How many days since your account got paused? When you closed your account the first time did you self exclude or state problem gambling as a reason?

Can you imagine a legitimate slot streamer not streaming DOA2 at release?

I'm in the UK and the app is working fine and has all the games. Maybe delete it and download it again.

Check this shit out, fucking lol.....: So that is 12 spins with only the top symbol frog, $$$$$ incoming Every spin was like the one above... The 12 spins done at the best configuration paid £2.10 (4x) FML 🤣

Finally: Pfffffffft: Should have known as it only took a couple of spins.

Look like you are about to gleefully rob a bank.

Pragmatic really don't care or have any concept of this. It's just a continuation of their "180 000x max win!" flair. It's a Chinese company - they don't care about conduct in a foreign market. Would the CCP allow them to offer their products to the entirety of the local population? I doubt it. Does the CCP care how foreign markets are exploited? I doubt it, it is likely encouraged.

The size of the withdrawals can be a factor.

Garga x2 = a win under 50x This game is so bad.

To celebrate the launch of our latest and greatest we are holding a bad luck tournament, post your spin history for all to see how devoid of potential our game is! First post showing 1000 spins without hitting a bonus gets 3 stuffed toy scatter symbols. $$$ raffle for those unfortunate enough to win money during their spins.

Is there someone you trust who you could grant control of your finances too? Someone who won't crumble and give back control the first time you test them? Access to all your accounts and access to your credit report so they can see you are not setting up any new bank accounts/credit accounts. Control your bank account, pay your bills with your money, put some of it onto a supermarket card so you can only spend it on food. You need someone to exercise control for as long as it takes for you to regain control.

Well that sucks. When the house lowers the RTP it increases the house advantage. In this case the house advantage has gone from 3.4% to 5.5% which, to simplify we will say is an increase of 50% (it is slightly over), means that you will lose 1.5 times what you would have expected to lose previously. Over time, for every £100 you would have lost previously you will now lose £150, for every £1000 you will now lose £1500 etc etc. Having said that your little session does not really mean anything and is not proof of anything. You need a lot more spins then 3897 to prove, display or notice a trend. If you were to analyse this session of 3897 spins it wouldn't indicate anything about the RTP that you think it does. 3897 spins at 5 KR with a result of -5000Nok means that you had a RTP of 74.44% for that session. The number of spins is just too tiny for any kind of statement about the 94.5% RTP as, if you were to use them to calculate the RTP, they will give you a result that is completely different then the 94.5% rtp. I did 20 000 spins on reactoonz last year that I kept track of and in those spins I hit 4 Garga and my RTP was +/- 40%. This was on the 96.5% version. I can't then post my resluts and say that they have lowed the bonus frequency to 1 in 5000. Does RTP even affect the bonus frequency? I doubt it. Book of Deads bonus frequency is in 177 spins. They don't need to change the bonus frequency when they can just make you hit one less 3 of a kind every xxx spins.

What was the end balance from this 5000NOK

1200x in 18 heartstoppers sounds pretty lucky to me.

No offense taken. I'd not talking from a position where I am convinced I am right and believe others to be wrong. My position is that if you are going to make a post saying a law, code of conduct, procedure or legislation is not been adhered to then you should be aware of what that particular law, code of conduct, procedure or legislation is. I'm not say that, when you sense something is been compromised, you should have some innate knowledge of these laws but rather that; as the laws, codes of conduct, procedures and legislation is all available to the public, a little bit of investigation would empower the OP. That is all I am saying and I don't really understand how you can argue against it.

You have read a tiny fraction of it. I could read the law stating I must wear a driving belt and then argue that it leave me a lot of room for manipulation. Nowhere in the laws regarding wearing a driving belt does it, for example say that I can't park my car, in a disabled spot. SteveJ has sought out this information because I am here constantly contradicting him. I'm glad he is finally doing so. I get worked up because people clueless about the legislation are prattling on, that this or that, is violating the legislation that they have no clue about. I'm glad if you look into the legislation and point out holes, or see how it can be manipulated, based on your KNOWLEDGE of the legislation rather then your Ignorance of the legislation. I hope you read more of it. There is not only the Gaming act and associated legislation relating to online operators but also a crossover with the non remote operations, there is also the codes of conduct and operating standards, which, while not technically laws are to be assumed as laws. Continue reading and I'm just happy Stevej is investigating rather then just speculating. Hopefully you will follow suit. Those who can, teach lol

Debate won with a precision strike! Not sure which debate.

Ah, it's funny how one little comment can make you warm to someone. I wish I could, she was hella cute but a lifetime has passed and we are on opposite sides of the world. Anyway, it's good to have things to lament now and then.

I can state that Elizabeth ignored my affections in primary school, I can say she was really dismissive and had it out for me, I can't paint a picture of her as been cold and standoffish - the truth is I never got the courage to approach her, or try to engage her in anyway, because I was too wrapped up in my own self doubt and beliefs. You can't state that they obviously don't want to take part when you have never made any legitimate attempt to involve casinos or elicit their feedback.

Maybe because the banks regulated themselves and the financial conduct authority didn't actually regulate banks. The bank sent them documents saying they are regulating themselves and not violating any laws and the FCA just signed that they have received that document and filed it away. The FCA didn't actually do anything prior to this financial crash you are citing/know nothing about. I am not saying there isn't shit going on but you kids couldn't find your way to the bottom of a playground slide.

My work here is done.

Stevej Last time. This is Law Practice who will take care of the legal side of things when you are attempting to acquire an operating licence. Its like a Real Estate agent that you use to buy a house, they take care of the paperwork, they take your fee and give it to the seller, the seller gives the agent the deed to the property and pass that to you. It's all documented along the way and the Real Estate agent makes sure everything is signed and correct. That paragraph, and that whole sites looks like it has been translated to English, from Russian, via Google translate, is trying to convey the difference between a legitimate licenced casino and a rogue one. That there are honest casinos and dishonest casinos, that if you want to get a licence you need to be the honest version and that having said licence will convey to your customers that you can be trusted. It is trying to say that it is important you get RNG certified so people know you can be trusted. The English, is admittedly terrible on this site. It's not really what you are looking for but, if you can find something similar with competently translated native language then you will learn something. What you are looking at is JUST the technical standards, it is a very small part of the legislation. Keep looking though as you are on the right track. Once you actually find some legit information to digest your response is "Obviously noone cares - it iz what it iz..." And you wonder why I am hostile.

When looking for information, that is freely available to the public, it is normally best to look in the public domain. try google click a UKGC link and see where it leads you. It’s partially why I get so annoyed as there is no effort put in by you guys, just speculation, and stroking each other to climax.