24Slots Casino Review

The player from Germany experienced a problem with 24Slots casino, where both the deposit bonus and balance were deleted after playing for a few hours, despite having only played one game. The chat support had been contacted, and the issue was under review. The Complaints Team extended the timer for the player to respond, but due to a lack of communication from her, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Germany formally escalated a complaint regarding his account closure following a request for self-exclusion on July 22, 2024, which the casino had ignored. He demanded reimbursement for financial losses incurred due to the casino's negligence in handling his request, which he claimed operated without a valid license in Germany. The issue was resolved when the player accepted a settlement offer of 424 euros from the casino after months of delay. The complaint was marked as 'resolved' in the system upon confirmation of the payment.

The player from Spain struggled with a gambling addiction and had been trying to close his account since August 25th. Despite communicating his issues and requesting closure after losing 1000€, the casino had not yet acted on his requests. The Complaints Team confirmed that the self-exclusion request was only sent to the correct email on September 2nd, and the account was subsequently closed on September 9th. The complaint was ultimately rejected due to the player not utilizing the correct email address regarding the self-exclusion request.

The player from Spain had requested a withdrawal of 255 euros but had not received any information regarding the timelines. Feeling distrustful due to the casino's low rating, the player had already submitted the necessary documentation and was filing a complaint for resolution. The complaint was resolved with rejection due to the player's account being closed after the casino canceled the withdrawals and imposed high rollover requirements. It was noted that the player did not recommend the casino.

The player from Germany had requested the closure of his account due to gambling addiction, but the casino did not respond to multiple emails regarding self-exclusion. He was still able to deposit money despite indicating the urgency of his situation. The Complaints Team was unable to assist further as the player did not respond to inquiries for additional information, which resulted in the rejection of the complaint. Eventually, the player confirmed that the casino had refunded him, resolving the issue, and the complaint was marked as 'resolved'.

The player from Germany had requested account closure on June 12, 2024, after losing over €10,000, but the casino had ignored the request and offered a bonus instead. After losing an additional €20,000 in a month, the player reiterated the closure request on July 12, 2024, which was also ignored. The player had demanded the casino refund the losses totaling €22,823.19 due to a failure in player protection. The Complaints Team had closed the complaint as ‘unresolved’ due to the casino's lack of response. Subsequently, after further investigation, the case had been closed as rejected due to signs of evidence alteration and the regulator's decision in favor of the casino.

The player from Latvia, who had recently relapsed after a 3-year break from gambling, struggled with self-exclusion at 24Slots. The casino’s complicated self-exclusion process required additional sensitive information despite the player being fully verified. Additionally, the player continued to receive promotional messages despite opting out and lost almost all of his money while trying to block the account. The issue remained unresolved due to the player's lack of response to our follow-up questions, preventing further investigation or resolution.

The player from Canada had requested to close his Slot 24 account due to a gambling problem on April 3rd, but the casino ignored his emails. Consequently, he lost $4,380 and sought a refund, attributing his losses to the casino's negligence. We reviewed the evidence and found that the player had been redirected to the correct email address on the same day he requested self-exclusion but only sent the request months later, on June 8th. The casino processed the request within three working days. Therefore, no refund was issued, and the complaint was rejected.

The player from Germany reported that her money had turned into bonus money without activating a bonus, causing her to lose access after the page reloaded and her free spins disappeared. This had happened for the second time, with the first instance involving around 230 euros. The player sought a refund. The Complaints Team requested additional information and documents to investigate the issue but did not receive a timely response from the player. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to lack of communication.

The player from Portugal had requested self-exclusion due to a gambling addiction, but despite multiple emails to the casino, his account remained open. As a result, he continued to spend money, leading to significant losses. The casino confirmed that the account was closed after the intervention, citing procedural delays and the player's inconsistent requests. We determined the casino's response to be inadequate, emphasizing the need for immediate closure upon acknowledging a gambling problem. The case was closed as unresolved.

The player from Italy had initially encountered issues accessing the casino website, which he had believed to be due to a breach. This had prevented him from withdrawing his 350€ or closing his account. The player had managed to access the site through a different device and had attempted to withdraw his winnings. The casino had requested additional documents for verification before processing the withdrawal. After some time, the casino had confirmed that the player's withdrawal had been approved and processed. The player had confirmed receipt of a 50€ withdrawal but had not confirmed if the entire 350€ was received. Despite the withdrawal, the player had still experienced difficulties accessing the site without using a VPN. The issue had been considered resolved by the player, but the full withdrawal amount was not confirmed.

The player from Estonia had issues with a casino regarding payment, and complained about the lack of customer service response. The player's account had been verified and his winnings had been accumulated without an active bonus. The casino cancelled his payment without providing a reason. We intervened and contacted the casino, which responded that they needed additional documents from the player. After the player submitted the necessary documents, his withdrawal was processed and he received his winnings. The issue was then resolved.

The player from Germany had an issue with 24Slots Casino where he had turned €2000 into €11000. However, due to a severe gambling addiction, he had requested for account closure multiple times to prevent further gambling. Despite numerous email exchanges, his account was not blocked and he ended up gambling away all his winnings. There were also issues withdrawing money from sports betting. The player had sought a substantial refund. The casino maintained that the player had not met withdrawal requirements and failed to provide necessary verification documents. They also claimed that the player's self-exclusion request was handled within the designated timeframe. We found that the casino had taken too long to process the self-exclusion request, but since no deposits were made during this period, there were no refunds to be made. The complaint was rejected due to these reasons.

The player from Germany was experiencing difficulties with his balance being categorized as bonus money in the casino without his request or activation, which was preventing him from making further withdrawals. We had reached out to the player for further clarification and information about his issue. However, due to the player's lack of response to our inquiries, we were unable to proceed with the investigation. The complaint was therefore rejected.

The player from Sweden had €667 pending for over two weeks. She had used a Klarna card for transactions, which was a virtual card, and faced issues while trying to withdraw her winnings. The casino had requested additional documents for KYC verification, including a credit card statement to confirm the ownership of the virtual card used for deposits. The player had provided the required documents, and the casino had confirmed the receipt and the securing of her account. However, the player did not respond to further inquiries from the Complaints Team about the status of her withdrawal. As a result, the complaint was rejected due to lack of response from the player.

The player from Sweden, who had gambling issues, had been blocked from playing at Palmslots due to self-exclusion. Despite this, they were able to access and lose funds on another platform, 24Slots, which was owned by the same operator. The player had contacted 24Slots to discuss the issue and ask for a refund but received no response. The player claimed that the website's non-adherence to Mastercard's transaction laundering rules enabled this. We had established that self-exclusion from one casino did not automatically apply to all casinos owned by the same operator. The player's account at 24Slots was closed within a standard time frame after she reported her gambling addiction to them. Therefore, we concluded that the casino had acted in accordance with its terms and conditions.

A player from Germany deposited money in the casino but it hasn't been credited to their account yet. Despite contacting support, they've been advised to wait for 72 hours. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from Germany had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, his payout hadn't been received at that time. The Complaints Team had advised him to wait at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before submitting a complaint, as the delay could have been due to unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. However, the player later confirmed that he had received his money, and the issue was successfully resolved. The Complaints Team then marked the complaint as 'resolved' in their system.

The player from Germany had been waiting for a payout for 8 days, with no update on its status. Although his account had been verified and he had successfully made several withdrawals in the past, his recent payout request was cancelled for unspecified reasons. Despite the player's request for intervention, we had advised him to wait for a total of 14 days for the casino to process the payment. However, the player failed to respond to our messages, leading to the rejection of the complaint. The delay in the payout could have been due to unfinished KYC verification or high volume of withdrawal requests.

The player from Germany is facing an issue with a deposit of 1,500€ that he made via bank transfer 6 days ago. Despite reaching out to the casino several times via email and live chat, he has received no response. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Germany requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Their money hasn’t been received yet. We closed the complaint as resolved since the player confirmed receipt of the payment.

The player from Estonia is reporting an issue with 24slots casino regarding a delayed withdrawal which was expected to be confirmed within 48 hours. The complaint was resolved as the player received his payout.

The player from Germany had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The player reported that the casino had cancelled her withdrawal and requested her to apply again. Despite our efforts to understand the reason for the cancellation, the player did not respond to our queries. As a result, we couldn't conduct further investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Germany has requested a withdrawal of 1,700€ two weeks ago but is still waiting for it to be processed. The player notes that they have made several faster withdrawals from this casino in the past and played without bonuses. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Lower Saxony used a welcome bonus at a casino and won €2500. However, only €160 was transferred as per the casino's bonus withdrawal limit policy, resulting in disappointment and the player's decision to avoid the casino. The complaint was rejected as the player received his bonus from a 3rd party streamer which we have no access to such bonus conditions.

The player from Austria requested a withdrawal at the beginning of June. Regrettably, his account was blocked and winnings confiscated as he was suspected of having multiple accounts. The casino provided sufficient evidence resolving in the complaint being rejected.

The player believes his winnings were reduced incorrectly. The casino responded and stated that there had indeed been an error and that the player would be compensated with a further $400. The player received this amount to their account, but was told that it had to be further wagered before a withdrawal could be made. It was unclear why this wagering was necessary, but the player then completed the requirements and made a withdrawal. Consequently, the player considered the matter to be resolved so the complaint was closed.

The player from Lebanon has requested a withdrawal one week prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Spain requested a withdrawal five days prior to submitting this complaint. Simply, winnings haven’t been received yet. The casino claims the player played down his winnings. We closed the complaint because the player stopped responding to our questions.

The player from Sweden has submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.