Duelz Casino Review

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings hadn't been received yet. The Complaints Team had advised the player to be patient and wait for at least 14 days after the withdrawal request, as it was common for such transactions to take a few days or weeks to process. They also noted that the delay could have been due to unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. Despite extending the response time by 7 days, the player did not respond to further inquiries, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. We had advised the player to wait for at least 14 days post withdrawal request before submitting a complaint. We also extended the response time by an additional 7 days. However, due to the player's lack of response to our messages and questions, we were unable to proceed with further investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Her money hadn't been received yet. However, the issue was successfully resolved after the casino processed her withdrawal. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from the United Kingdom had complained about a £12,000 withdrawal that had been delayed for over a month. The casino had requested various actions from the player, threatened to confiscate the winnings, and was not responding to some emails. The player's account had also been closed. The player had provided all necessary documentation and had been previously verified by the casino. We had attempted to reach the casino multiple times but received no response. We had advised the player to contact eCOGRA and the Gambling Commission. After three months, the player confirmed that the casino had paid out his winnings. Therefore, the complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, his winnings had not been received yet. The Complaints Team had advised the player to wait at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before submitting a complaint, as delays might occur due to unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. The team had extended the response time by 7 days, but the player did not respond. Consequently, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the UK had won £7834.03 from games played with £3 won from free spins at Duelz Casino. However, the casino had only paid £100, claiming it was the maximum win from free spins. The player's account had been subsequently blocked. The player had her account verified and had wagered the £3 won from free spins until it became real balance, which she then used to play and accumulate her winnings. The casino had argued that the winnings were capped at £100 as per their general bonus T&Cs. We had invited the casino to provide a detailed explanation and relevant evidence to substantiate its claims. However, the casino cited GDPR and suggested the player contact the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Provider eCogra. We had recommended the player submit a complaint to eCOGRA, but the player had stopped responding, resulting in the rejection of the complaint.

The player from the UK was facing issues withdrawing £350 from Duelz casino. She reported that despite the Trustly option stating 'instant', her withdrawal had been delayed. She also expressed difficulty in accessing live chat support and her emails had gone unanswered. We tried to investigate her issue and asked for additional information, but the player did not respond to our messages. As a result, we were unable to proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting that complaint. His money hadn't been received yet. The Complaints Team had advised the player that withdrawal processing could take up to 14 days and had asked for his patience. Despite extending the response period by 7 days, the player did not provide any further information or updates. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to lack of player's response.

The player from the United Kingdom, who had already been verified, experienced a delay with a withdrawal of £2,000 from a £3,000 win on Duelz. Despite having contacted customer service and having received assurances of a quicker processing time, he was still waiting for the payment after four days. The player later reported that the £2,000 had been deposited into his bank account. We marked the complaint as resolved.

A player from the United Kingdom had deposited over £5000 in the casino; his account was unexpectedly closed, and he then lacked a channel of communication with them. The player's account had been fully verified, but he had no remaining balance and hadn't won any money. We confirmed that the casino had had the right to close the account without providing a reason, and since the deposited balance had already been lost, there was no possibility for a refund. As there was nothing further we could do, we had to close the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had lodged a complaint regarding a delayed withdrawal from Duelz Casino. The Complaints Team had advised him to wait for at least 14 days after the withdrawal request, as delays could occur due to KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. The player later confirmed that he had received his winnings. Consequently, the Complaints Team marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from United Kingdom's nephew accessed her bank account, deposited £1600 into Duelz casino, and lost all the funds. The player contacted the bank and the casino but received no assistance, and now her attempts to communicate are being ignored. The complaint was rejected as it is not possible to prove who deposited into the casino and the player's can' t request a refund once the money is lost.

The player from the United Kingdom was experiencing a delay with his withdrawal request. He had previously made successful withdrawals from the same online casino and had passed the KYC verification process. However, his latest withdrawal request for £200 had been held up. The casino stated they required additional documents for KYC verification, which the player insisted he had already provided. After our attempts to encourage cooperation from the player failed, we had no choice but to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom verified their account with Duelz and successfully won £300. Despite being verified, they requested additional documents and subsequently disabled the player's account during a bonus game. The complaint was closed as the player's account got closed with no remaining balance.

The player from the UK is unable to withdraw £3,500 from his account. His attempts to resolve the issue through casino's customer support have been unsuccessful. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the United Kingdom claims that her bank account was misused for depositing funds on the casino site under an account not registered to her name. She attempted to contact the casino but received no reply.

The player from United Kingdom has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the United Kingdom has a blocked account and £1200 winnings confiscated. The casino claimed the player violated bonus compliance rules; however, the player insists they never claimed or used any bonuses. Later, since the casino informed us that the matter was already being handled by ADR, and they were waiting for its final decision, the complaint was temporarily closed pending the outcome of the ADR's investigation. Based on the information and details received from the complainant via email, the complaint was updated to 'rejected'. ADR (eCOGRA) decided in favor of the casino.

The player from the United Kingdom passed initial verification and requested a withdrawal after the first win. He self-excluded himself, but the casino has asked for additional photos. The player has refused and the payment, even his deposit, hasn't been processed for 3 days. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

A player from the United Kingdom was playing and had accumulated around £1000 in winnings, but was abruptly self-excluded by the casino without consent. The player is experiencing non-responsiveness from the casino regarding this issue. The complaint was rejected as the palyer stopped responding.

A player from Sweden is unable to withdraw money from their account. The player was asked to verify their identity and subsequently requested their account to be closed. Currently, the player doesn't have access to their account or winnings of 330 SEK. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

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

The player from United Kingdom has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Their money hasn’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from New Zealand is experiencing difficulties verifying his casino account due to missing proof of income and wealth. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from United Kingdom requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from United Kingdom 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.

The player from United Kingdom has submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. After a closer examination, we ended up rejecting this complaint as there is reasonable suspicion that the player has provided tampered documents and thus failed the verification process.

The player from United Kingdom has submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the UK was unable to withdraw his winnings from the casino. We tried to contact the casino several times, but there was no reaction from their side. We were forced to close the complaint as unresolved and recommended that the player contact the gambling authority. The player's account remained suspended, and he faced difficulties in verifying his account due to alleged technical issues and lack of response from the casino.

The player from United Kingdom 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.

The player's account got closed as his country became restricted. After our intervention, we were able to help the player to get their winnings. The player confirmed they received the funds in the end. The Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Sweden has been accused of opening multiple accounts. The casino couldn't share information about the case due to GDPR. We closed the case temporarily, because the player involved alternative dispute resolution body. After we reopened the complaint we asked the player to send us the official statement from the alternative dispute resolution center. We closed the complaint because the player stopped responding.

The player from the UK was experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to ongoing verification. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from the United Kingdom has requested several withdrawals two days prior to submitting this complaint. Simply, winnings haven’t been received yet. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the United Kingdom is experiencing difficulties withdrawing his funds due to limited availability of payment methods. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player was unable to contact the casino as they were non-responsive. The casino had been active at first but later stopped responding, which forced us to close the case as 'unresolved.' The player faced difficulties with document verification for his account, leading to a prolonged process. After multiple attempts to communicate and provide the necessary documentation, the player ultimately received his funds. The case was marked as 'resolved' following the casino's confirmation that the required information had finally been received.

The player from the United Kingdom is experiencing difficulties withdrawing her winnings due to ongoing verification. The casino responded and stated that they would contact the player shortly. The player then stated that they had been issued a refund, but when asked to clarify the details of this they became unresponsive. It seems that the issue may have been resolved, but without confirmation from the player, the complaint was eventually rejected.

The player from the UK deposited from a business Paypal account, so the casino decided to confiscate all accumulated winnings. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Germany has deposited funds into her account from her boyfriend’s payment method. The casino confiscated winnings and closed the account. Since this was done in compliance with the General T&Cs, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had their account blocked after requesting deposit limits. The cashback back bonus hasn't been honored. After a closer examination, we ended up rejecting this complaint as unjustified.

The player from the UK was having difficulties withdrawing winnings due to incomplete verification. The casino refused to provide us with the data for review due to its strict internal policy and GDPR, and the complaint should have been resolved by IBAS. We closed the complaint temporarily as unresolved until the IBAS's final decision is made. After receipt of an update from the player, it looks like IBAS made the final decision, so we reopened the case. IBAS decided that the casino was right and acted in accordance with its terms and conditions, and we do not have a reason to question its decision. All the deposits made to the complainant's disputed casino account were refunded. Therefore, the complaint was rejected.

The player from the United Kingdom was experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to ongoing verification. The casino stated that the player had opened multiple accounts, but would only supply evidence to their official ADR service so the player submitted a complaint to them also. This complaint was therefore closed temporarily whilst we awaited the decision of the regulator. After some time, the casino requested that the complaint be reopened as the ADR's investigation had reached a conclusion. It was decided that as the player could not satisfy the casino’s verification check, they were fully entitled to close the customer’s account and confiscate his winnings. The player confirmed this was the decision and so the complaint was rejected.

The player from Finland provided all the required documents, but his account has been closed. After that the casino asked for additional documents. The complaint was resolved as the player successfuly verified and withdrawn his winnings.

The player from Manitoba had faced a delay in withdrawing his winnings of $600 due to an initial lack of a passport for verification. After he had obtained and submitted his passport, he still experienced delays from the casino's side. The player had self-excluded from his account but had been assured by casino agents that his balance was still intact. The player had contacted our complaints team for assistance, and after our intervention, the casino had confirmed that they would send the funds via bank transfer. Despite a technical hitch that initially caused the transfer to fail, the casino eventually succeeded in transferring the funds. The player had confirmed receipt of his winnings, and the case was subsequently closed.

The player from the United Kingdom had found his account excluded from a casino he had been depositing in for 2-3 months. He had £800 in pending withdrawal and was seeking information on the status of his funds. After the Complaints Team's intervention and communication with the casino, the player's issue had been successfully resolved and the pending withdrawal was paid out. The account exclusion issue remained unclear, but the player's main concern regarding the withdrawal had been addressed.