What Happened
A player from Hungary says Betpanda is holding about 94,600 HUF in cashback and will not close their account until that cashback is released, which they see as a breach of responsible gambling. They say live chat gave contradictory answers and cut the conversations short. The player asked for the money to be released by hand and the account closed for good.
How It Developed
- Complaint opened with chat transcripts attached.
- The mediator explained the difference between a simple closure and a self-exclusion and asked why the player wanted the account closed, plus copies of the requests and replies.
- After reviewing the emails, the mediator said the player had asked for closure several times but never mentioned gambling harm, so none of it counted as self-exclusion. The player was given a template to send, with the mediator in copy.
- No reply came; after an extension the complaint was closed. It can be reopened.
Abandoned
The player stopped responding after being told their closure requests did not count as self-exclusion.
What Helped
The mediator's advice is the takeaway: a closure request only carries weight as self-exclusion if you state the reason, name a period and keep a copy. The player never sent the suggested email.