Yes, unless under a very special situation, mostly, live support does not have power to grant self-exclusion, there is a procedure and protocol that needed to be done to apply for self-exclusion. This applies to many casinos, not just roobet.

The reason, I assume, is because for an exclusion to lock-in, they will need details that may only be asked by and provided to certain team on the casino, a completely different division than live support. I hope that helps why the live support keep saying they can't help you and redirect you to the self-exclusion procedure.


I might be wrong, but that's very likely because you asked for a ban, of which they translates as a break. The circumstances surrounding it has been explained in my previous post. If you wrote that you asked for exclusion or in any part of your email body said that you have problem with gambling, their responsible gambling act will kick in and you'll get exclusion instead.

I think this part is clear, not sure why you keep repeating the same question as it's not explained in abundance.


And you lied? Again?

Curiosity or not, you lied about your gambling addiction. And if we take your words that you want to merely test what'll happen instead of deliberately deceiving them, why do you play with your first account instead of asking it to be closed right after you regained access?


Next, about this one. This is me completely guessing and I might be wrong. But I think, what happened here:

They need certain details for a self-exclusion to lock in, like IP, device fingerprints, govt. ID provided during KYC, and other things that ties username to a person. Your first account was not marked as a problematic gambler. You asked for a ban and you lied during assessment that lead them to believe you're ok. And then it went inactive as you use your second account on later days.

With second account, you wrote a statement that triggers their responsible gambling act and prompt them to exclude you, armed with the data they have in your second account to put "face" into [user]name. Still, your first account went under the radar as it was dormant and they couldn't tie those "face" into the first username.

It's only after a brief moment of it being reactivated and their algorithm detect multi-acc that they tied the first account to the second, thus banning it in less than five days.

I hope that clarifies enough, and with your third account being refunded, is there other issue you'd like to escalate or discuss? If not, I'll begin to try to reach Roobet and appeal to them to refund what's left on your second account, suppose bonus is considered as a payable, as it is [by current narrative] rightfully yours.