Unibet Faces Dutch Data Dispute: Gambler Refund Claims Stalled

Imagine demanding records to reclaim your gambling losses, only to face endless delays from your betting operator.

That’s the controversy swirling around Kindred-owned Unibet, now in a heated dispute with Dutch authorities.

Picture frustrated players, calling the delays “sabotage,” as the KSA faces pressure to act against potential data breaches.

Read on to uncover the behind-the-scenes tension, the legal ramifications, and how these developments might shape Dutch iGaming.

Unibet Accused of Blocking Gambler Refund Claims: Dutch Data Dispute Intensifies

3 Key Points

1. Unibet allegedly withholds crucial transaction overviews, halting gambler attempts to reclaim historic losses.
2. Lawyer Benzi Loonstein accuses Unibet of stalling GDPR data requests and urges political action.
3. KSA is called upon to intervene, as Maltese laws and a corporate transition complicate the dispute.

Kindred-owned Unibet stands accused of hindering Dutch gamblers who want to reclaim their historic player losses. The dispute centers on transaction overviews that players need to present in court as proof of deposits and withdrawals. However, critics argue that Unibet has allegedly withheld these essential records, effectively blocking legal efforts.

Reports from Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf ignited the controversy. The coverage claims that Unibet—despite now holding a valid licence from the Netherlands KSA—has stopped providing transaction data that once helped players assemble claims for refunds. Attorney Benzi Loonstein, representing thousands of clients via Loonstein Advocaten, asserts that Unibet is intentionally refusing requests for deposit and withdrawal records.

In previous rulings, Dutch courts declared all pre-2021 player-operator contracts void. Judges reasoned that unlicensed gambling was illegal before the Netherlands regulated its online gaming sector in October 2021. Consequently, they ordered operators to repay all losses incurred by players in that unlicensed period. Since those verdicts, some players have sought to reclaim significant sums.

Initially, Kindred Group (Unibet’s parent) complied after a Dutch court mandated refunds. But, Loonstein says, cooperation faltered as soon as the first reimbursements were processed. Unibet began extending the GDPR response timeline from 30 days to 90, then 180, before ultimately refusing to provide data.

Kindred justifies these delays by referencing Maltese regulations and an internal corporate restructuring. The brand sold certain operations to La Française des Jeux (FDJ), meaning the entity that ran Unibet in the Netherlands before 2021—Trannel Limited—was divested. Meanwhile, the new owner of Trannel must handle litigation and GDPR inquiries. However, from Unibet’s perspective, the “legal complexity” complicates data retrieval.

Unibet suggests players retrieve their data from their banks. Yet, Loonstein believes this is inadequate. Typical bank records only extend five to eight years, failing to cover deposits dating back to 2004. Moreover, transactions via intermediaries like PayPal or other third-party services may not explicitly reference “Unibet,” making it impossible for players to prove who handled the money.

Calls for KSA Intervention
Attorney Loonstein wrote a letter to the Dutch House of Representatives, labeling Unibet’s conduct “sabotage.” He insists the operator’s refusal to supply essential documentation violates the GDPR. According to Loonstein, Dutch law entitles citizens to review their personal data from any entity that has collected it. Hence, Unibet’s alleged stonewalling flouts GDPR obligations.

He urges the KSA—the Netherlands’ gambling regulator—and politicians to tackle these abuses. Loonstein portrays the situation as dire, warning that thousands of people are denied rightful compensation due to the operator’s data blockade. Some fear that if operators face no real punishment, others may replicate the same tactics.

An Ongoing Dispute
GAMINGO.news has reached out to Kindred Group, the KSA, and Loonstein for official statements. Meanwhile, no resolution has emerged. Observers speculate the matter may reignite discussions around Betsson, Entain, and other international operators that once served Dutch customers without a local licence.

Furthermore, the dispute surfaces at a critical moment. In June, the Dutch Supreme Court received questions on whether gamblers can legally reclaim lost money from unlicensed online providers. Loonstein anticipates an answer by the start of this year. If the Supreme Court upholds earlier rulings, all unlicensed operators might be compelled to reimburse historical losses. That potential liability makes the Unibet data standoff even more pressing.

Unibet’s alleged refusal to provide transaction data has led to heavy criticism, lawsuits, and calls for KSA action. While the operator cites Maltese laws and restructuring complexities, Dutch gamblers and their lawyer, Benzi Loonstein, emphasize GDPR rights and the operator’s earlier compliance. The standoff reflects deeper tensions in the Dutch iGaming market as it transitions to strict regulation. Whether or not the courts and regulator clamp down on Unibet’s approach, the outcome may reshape how historical claims and operator obligations unfold in the Netherlands.

The post Unibet Faces Dutch Data Dispute: Gambler Refund Claims Stalled appeared first on Gamingo News.

Imagine demanding records to reclaim your gambling losses, only to face endless delays from your betting operator. That’s the controversy swirling around Kindred-owned Unibet, now in a heated dispute with Dutch authorities. Picture frustrated players, calling the delays “sabotage,” as the KSA faces pressure to act against potential data breaches. Read on to uncover the
The post Unibet Faces Dutch Data Dispute: Gambler Refund Claims Stalled appeared first on Gamingo News.