Ok I apologize for that.

I contend that Housebets's actions directly violate Curaçao Gaming Control Board (GCB) regulations and principles of fair play. My arguments are as follows:

• Unequivocal Licensee Responsibility: The GCB regulations place the sole responsibility for the conduct of sports betting operations on the licensee. "3. Operation of the sports betting activities" explicitly states: "The licensee is at all times solely responsible for the fulfillment of all obligations, be it financial or other, resulting from or regarding the sports betting activities at the casino operating under his license...". Housebets cannot deflect responsibility for ensuring the legality of their operations onto the player.  
  
• Illegality of Transactions: If my participation was illegal due to my location, Housebets acted improperly by accepting my deposits. This contravenes responsible gaming conduct and potentially violates GCB regulations. The acceptance of funds, in this case, should be deemed the sole responsibility of the casino, as stated in the regulations.
• Unjust Enrichment: Housebets has been unjustly enriched by retaining funds they should not have accepted. I am entitled to a full refund of these deposits under the principle of unjust enrichment.
• Contradictory and Misleading Conduct: Housebets's acceptance of my deposits and allowing me to play, with full knowledge of my location since February 28th, directly contradicts their reliance on term 2.1.1. This demonstrates a disregard for regulatory compliance and constitutes misleading conduct.
• GCB's Expectation of Fair Play: While not explicitly defined, the GCB's emphasis on licensee responsibility and the "Guideline Responsible Gaming" implies an expectation of fair and responsible conduct. Actions that go against this guideline, such as Housebets's, may be seen as non-compliant, and the "Non compliance with these guidelines may be subject to disciplinary action by the Gaming Control Board."