Zdravo!
Hvala na odgovoru.
Igrač nas je prvobitno kontaktirao zahtevajući zatvaranje naloga zbog navodnog problema sa kockanjem. U potpunosti u skladu sa našim procedurama odgovornog kockanja, nalog je odmah zatvoren.
Sedamnaest (17) dana kasnije, igračica nas je ponovo kontaktirala, navodeći da je u stabilnom i čistom mentalnom stanju i da želi da ponovo otvori svoj nalog.
Pre ponovnog otvaranja, igrač je dobrovoljno potpisao zvanično odricanje od odgovornosti kojim potvrđuje da:
- Ona ne pati od problema sa kockanjem
- Ona razume i prihvata punu odgovornost za svaku buduću igračku aktivnost.
Važno je napomenuti da je ovaj dokument potpisan kada igrač nije imao aktivne gubitke, nije imao neizmirene opklade i nije imao otvorene depozite u kazinu.
Stoga je odluka o ponovnom otvaranju računa doneta u mirnom, racionalnom i emocionalno stabilnom stanju, slobodnom od bilo kakvog uticaja odbojnosti prema gubitku, frustracije ili finansijskog pritiska.
Nakon što je nalog ponovo otvoren, igrač je nastavio da uplaćuje nove depozite i igra potpuno dobrovoljno. Sve opklade su prihvaćene i pošteno rešene u skladu sa našim Uslovima i odredbama. Žalba je podneta tek nakon što su ove dobrovoljne opklade rezultirale gubicima.
Da su ishodi bili u korist igrača, svi dobici bi bili isplaćeni u celosti — kao što je uvek bila naša praksa. Stoga, zahtev za povraćaj gubitaka koji su nastali usled fer i legitimne igre ne može biti opravdan niti se smatrati validnim, jer bi fundamentalno iskrivio matematički integritet igara i utvrđenu prednost kuće.
Povraćaj novca za gubitke od igranja nakon što su rezultati poznati efikasno bi uklonio ravnotežu između rizika i povrata - osnovni princip na kojem funkcionišu sve regulisane igre na sreću.
Štaviše, ako Casino.Guru smatra da igrač koji, u mirnom i zdravom stanju uma, potpiše pravni dokument kojim izjavljuje da nema bilo kakvih problema sa kockanjem, kasnije treba da bude vraćen za depozite koje je dobrovoljno izvršio — to ne bi spadalo pod definiciju poremećaja kockanja.
Takvo ponašanje bi umesto toga ukazivalo na psihijatrijski ili kognitivni problem koji je van okvira standardnih politika odgovornog kockanja.
Nismo medicinski ili psihijatrijski stručnjaci, niti su operateri kazina obavezni ili opremljeni da dijagnostikuju mentalna zdravstvena stanja kod osoba koje se predstavljaju kao stabilne, logične i samosvesne — posebno kada u vreme potpisivanja nije bilo gubitaka.
-Tim Blejzbet
Hello!
Thanks for the answer.
The player initially contacted us requesting account closure due to a claimed gambling problem. In full accordance with our responsible gambling procedures, the account was immediately closed.
Seventeen (17) days later, the player contacted us again, stating that she was in a stable and clear mental condition and wished to reopen her account.
Before reopening, the player voluntarily signed a formal waiver of liability confirming that:
- She does not suffer from a gambling problem
- She understands and accepts full responsibility for any future gaming activity.
It is important to note that this document was signed when the player had no active losses, no pending wagers, and no open deposits with the casino.
Therefore, the decision to reopen the account was made in a calm, rational, and emotionally stable state, free from any influence of loss aversion, frustration, or financial pressure.
After the account was reopened, the player proceeded to make new deposits and play entirely voluntarily. All wagers were accepted and settled fairly in accordance with our Terms and Conditions. The complaint was raised only after these voluntary wagers resulted in losses.
Had the outcomes been in the player’s favor, all winnings would have been paid in full — as has always been our practice. Therefore, a request to refund losses that resulted from fair and legitimate play cannot be justified or considered valid, as it would fundamentally distort the mathematical integrity of the games and the established house edge.
Refunding gameplay losses after outcomes are known would effectively remove the balance between risk and return — a core principle upon which all regulated gaming operates.
Furthermore, if Casino.Guru believes that a player who, in a calm and healthy state of mind, signs a legal document declaring the absence of any gambling problem should later be refunded for deposits made voluntarily — this would not fall under the definition of a gambling disorder.
Such behavior would instead suggest a psychiatric or cognitive issue that falls outside the scope of standard responsible gambling policies.
We are not medical or psychiatric professionals, nor are casino operators required or equipped to diagnose mental health conditions in individuals who present themselves as stable, logical, and self-aware — particularly when no losses were present at the time of signing.
-The Blazebet Team
Automatski prevedeno: