Pergunta sobre bloqueio de cassino

Hello everyone,

I have a question about the rules for self-exclusion.

In 2024, I had myself permanently banned from Novajackpot Casino, explicitly stating gambling addiction as the reason. Novajackpot belongs to the Liernin Enterprises LTD group.

Despite this ban, I was able to register at other casinos within the same corporate group in 2025 and 2026 and deposit and play there without any problems. I used the same personal data as for my blocked account.

My question: Aren't operators like Liernin Enterprises obligated to block a player group-wide if a gambling problem is known? In such a case, am I entitled to a refund of losses incurred at sister casinos after the initial block?

Thank you for your assessment

Hallo zusammen,

ich habe eine Frage zu den Regeln für den Selbstausschluss (Self-Exclusion).

Im Jahr 2024 habe ich mich beim Casino Novajackpot dauerhaft sperren lassen und dabei explizit Spielsucht als Grund angegeben. Novajackpot gehört zur Gruppe Liernin Enterprises LTD.

Trotz dieser Sperre konnte ich mich in den Jahren 2025 und 2026 bei anderen Casinos derselben Unternehmensgruppe anmelden und dort problemlos einzahlen und spielen. Ich habe dabei dieselben persönlichen Daten verwendet wie bei meinem gesperrten Konto.

Meine Frage: Sind Betreiber wie Liernin Enterprises nicht dazu verpflichtet, einen Spieler gruppenweit zu sperren, wenn eine Spielsucht-Problematik bekannt ist? Habe ich in einem solchen Fall Anspruch auf eine Rückerstattung der Verluste, die bei den Schwester-Casinos nach der ursprünglichen Sperre entstanden sind?

Vielen Dank für eure Einschätzung

Unfortunately, it doesn't always work this way even though we would really like that as well. It would be helpful to everyone with gambling issues, of course.

It doesn't always go this way because even though the casinos may be in the same group, they can have different management, for example, and we are unable to help even though we would like to.

If you feel that you need help with your issue, please search for some professional help. It is always better to have someone by your side and not go through such a situation alone.

Probably not, because the group is one thing, the casinos are different.

They would tell you that you didn't tell about your problem on that specific platform of theirs. And they would be partially right, the casinos in one group don't intertwine their bases of players or don't change info with one another..

Thank you for the replies.

I understand that casino groups sometimes operate different brands with separate management or databases. However, in my case the situation is slightly different.

Both Novajackpot and the other casinos I registered at are operated under the same license holder: Liernin Enterprises LTD (License No. 24-0012).

According to the PAGCOR Responsible Gaming Code of Practice, Section 15.3, an exclusion order should be enforced in all gaming facilities operated by the same licensee.

Since my permanent self-exclusion at Novajackpot was explicitly requested due to gambling problems, I assumed that my personal data would be blocked across all platforms operated under that same license.

That is why I am trying to understand whether the operator had an obligation to enforce the exclusion across its licensed brands, or whether each platform can legally treat the exclusion independently.

If anyone has experience with similar cases under PAGCOR licensing, I would really appreciate hearing abou

PAGCOR's framework is designed to enforce exclusions across all licensed operators via the NDRP.

However, whether the operator was legally obligated in this specific case depends on whether Novajackpot properly submitted the exclusion to PAGCOR's central database.

If they didn't, the fault may lie with Novajackpot's internal compliance process.. so I don't know what would be better to be done in that case.

Thanks for the insight regarding the NDRP, john_strider.

However, from my perspective, whether Novajackpot properly reported the exclusion to the central database or not is an internal compliance issue of the operator. As the Licensee, Liernin Enterprises LTD is legally responsible for ensuring that their own brands (like Rolldorado) are synced with their player protection data.

According to Section 15.3, the obligation is clear: the exclusion must be enforced across ALL facilities under the same license. Since I used the exact same personal data, any failure to block me is a direct breach of their licensing agreement.

In my view, this makes every deposit I made after August 22, 2024, legally void. If the operator accepts money in violation of their mandatory 'Duty of Care' and licensing rules, they have no right to keep those funds. Therefore, I believe a full refund of all net deposits is the only fair resolution, as they should not be allowed to profit from their own compliance failures.

Has anyone here successfully pushed for a refund based on a licensee's failure to sync sister brands?

'legally void deposits' is a strong claim that would likely need to be tested formally.. but i think you should be right regarding the data they have.

The most effective path in cases like this should be filing a complaint directly with PAGCOR's Player Protection Division, citing the specific breach of licensing conditions.

though i wonder when they would come up to do something about it..