How should the error lie with you? It is not your system and can therefore only be the fault of someone who can intervene in the system or who can work with the system whether it is the GGL or Lugas specifically has its own company or even the game Provider in no case can it be the fault of the person who only tries to log in somewhere with name and address because where do you have the function of it in your hand?
Actually, the GGL should work with you in such a case, I mean the whole regulation stands and falls with this Player protection argument and if some providers set up the system incorrectly and players can therefore Deposit more than intended, such a thing should not be a trifle
In my opinion, this can of course lead to a loss of control if you suddenly realize you can deposit at xy after all...
At the latest then (of course it may be too late) you should react yourself and set the limit to €1 with the relevant provider and then see that the problem is resolved.
However, as you upload your passport everywhere, I think the main blame lies with the provider, who was apparently unable to compare the data entered and personal data properly.
Hey, then I'm in for some hot times at NetBet. I have inadvertently immortalized my second name Ulrich as Urlich. The only problem with implementing this potential escalation project is that I would never Deposit a cent with NetBet
Fortunateli wrote on 16.08.2024 at 12:01: MoinMoin together,
i have a basic question regarding the set monthly Deposit limit across all providers.
Let's assume that the limit of EUR 1,000 has been reached and I can no longer deposit anywhere until the following month. Strangely enough, however, there is a Provider where this continues to work without any problems 🤔 Deposits exceed the set limit by far
far exceed the set limit, almost doubling it. Now, of course, you could look down your own nose and think "It's your own fault"... But what is this protection law for? In my opinion, the provider is clearly to blame. And wouldn't the provider then be obliged/required, purely from a moral point of view, to refund unauthorized depositors who exceed the set limit by return of post?
by far the set limit, almost doubled. Now, of course, you could look down your own nose and think "It's your own fault"... But then what is this protection law for? In my opinion, the Provider is clearly to blame. And wouldn't the provider then be obliged/required, purely from a moral point of view, to refund unauthorized depositors who exceed the set limit by return of post?
Difficult question. Actually, he would have to pay back the depositors. If Player protection is not implemented properly, it's not your fault.
You must not forget that this limit exists for people who cannot control themselves! Then it would be really strange to say "Ok yes the limit has failed but you should have controlled yourself"
gamble1 wrote on 19.08.2024 at 13:09: You must not forget that this limitation exists for people who cannot control themselves! Then it would be really strange if you said "Ok yes the limit failed but you should have controlled yourself"
Not quite right what you say... This limit exists because it was decided by the GG. For a few weeks now, with the possibility of increasing it up to EUR 10,000 after a credit check... So it has nothing directly to do with "for people who can't control themselves"... And even if it did, a limit is a limit. Or do you think the control only applies to the player and not to the providers? Then there is no need for any regulations🤔
Not quite right what you say... This limit exists because it was decided by the GG. For a few weeks now with the possibility of increasing it up to 10,000 euros, after checking creditworthiness... So it has nothing to do with "for people who can't control themselves" in the direct sense... And even if it did, a limit is a limit. Or do you think the control only applies to the player and not to the providers? Then there is no need for any regulations🤔
However, the law always refers to Player protection in all actions and directives, so if this point is not implemented, what is the point of the law?
gamble1 wrote on 19.08.2024 at 14:38:
But the law always refers to Player protection in all actions and instructions, so if this point is not implemented, what is the point of the law?
Uhh that's exactly what I'm talking about... Maybe read my words again...
That's curious 😄
But I strongly believe the landlords from my pub would not care how much someone takes out before they pull the plug, a lot must have happened to them
but I'm also curious to see if the TE will get in touch here again.
Rights Obligations of the player
Liked this post: gamble1
In my opinion, this can of course lead to a loss of control if you suddenly realize you can deposit at xy after all...
At the latest then (of course it may be too late) you should react yourself and set the limit to €1 with the relevant provider and then see that the problem is resolved.
However, as you upload your passport everywhere, I think the main blame lies with the provider, who was apparently unable to compare the data entered and personal data properly.
This post has been translated automatically
Rights Obligations of the player
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
Rights Obligations of the player
Nobody has liked this post so far
far exceed the set limit, almost doubling it. Now, of course, you could look down your own nose and think "It's your own fault"... But what is this protection law for? In my opinion, the provider is clearly to blame. And wouldn't the provider then be obliged/required, purely from a moral point of view, to refund unauthorized depositors who exceed the set limit by return of post?
This post has been translated automatically
Rights Obligations of the player
Nobody has liked this post so far
Difficult question. Actually, he would have to pay back the depositors. If Player protection is not implemented properly, it's not your fault.
This post has been translated automatically
Rights Obligations of the player
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
Rights Obligations of the player
Nobody has liked this post so far
Not quite right what you say... This limit exists because it was decided by the GG. For a few weeks now, with the possibility of increasing it up to EUR 10,000 after a credit check... So it has nothing directly to do with "for people who can't control themselves"... And even if it did, a limit is a limit. Or do you think the control only applies to the player and not to the providers? Then there is no need for any regulations🤔
This post has been translated automatically
Rights Obligations of the player
Nobody has liked this post so far
However, the law always refers to Player protection in all actions and directives, so if this point is not implemented, what is the point of the law?
This post has been translated automatically
Rights Obligations of the player
Nobody has liked this post so far
Uhh that's exactly what I'm talking about... Maybe read my words again...
This post has been translated automatically
Rights Obligations of the player
Nobody has liked this post so far
Yes, me too haha didn't want to say anything else from the beginning
This post has been translated automatically
Rights Obligations of the player
Nobody has liked this post so far
But I strongly believe the landlords from my pub would not care how much someone takes out before they pull the plug, a lot must have happened to them
but I'm also curious to see if the TE will get in touch here again.
This post has been translated automatically