Fair Go Casino Review

The player from Australia has been accused of breaching bonus terms by placing single bets greater than the allowed ones. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Australia won a certain amount of money after playing for several weeks, but they are facing issues when trying to withdraw their winnings. The casino keeps requesting identification verification, and despite providing various government-issued documents with matching addresses, they only receive automated responses. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The casino has denied player's payout and claims that he had activated a promotion whilst having funds over 1$. The player claims that he had played all of the money except for 86c. Looks like the player has violated one of the rules, which we consider to be unfair, and therefore his payout is denied. There is no mention of the amount disallowed for withdrawal.

The player from Australia has been accused of breaching the maximum allowed bet. After reviewing the player's game history, we found out that the player's winnings were confiscated in compliance with the bonus T&Cs, therefore, we were forced to close this complaint.

The player's winnings were voided for breaching the max bet rule. The casino supplied evidence that was sufficient in supporting this claim, and as the casino acted in accordance with its terms and conditions the complaint was rejected.

The player from California has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment has been canceled because the player breached the maximum allowed bet. Therefore, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from Australia had his entire balance confiscated as he had redeemed a free coupon while there was a withdrawal request in a 'Pending' state in his gaming account. Redeeming free coupons while having a 'Pending' withdrawal is, according to the casino's Terms and Conditions, prohibited, however, we believe that there was absolutely no reason to punish the player by voiding his entire balance (including the amount requested for withdrawal) as he had not gained any advantage by redeeming a free coupon, and therefore, we believe that the player's withdrawal should not have been affected by this breach. Furthermore, we believe that a reputable online casino should enforce rules like these as software, i.e. prevent players from breaching them by not allowing them to redeem a free coupon when they're not allowed to. The casino team refused to comply with our ruling. The case was closed as 'Unresolved' and classified as 'Against fair gambling'.

The player 'huebede' had their winnings voided for using a bonus while having a positive balance & pending withdrawal. The casino replied to the player pointing to a clause in their T&C which said that claiming a bonus while having an existing balance would lead to winnings being voided, even those in pending withdrawals. The original deposit amount was credited back to player's casino account. The complaint mediator agreed that using a violation on a current bonus to invalidate historically compliant winnings was non-valid, however, they had discussed this issue many times previously but the casino was refusing to change their position.

The player from Australia has been accused of breaching bonus terms by placing bets greater than the allowed ones. We ended up rejecting the complaint because it was not justified. The casino provided relevant evidence suggesting that the maximum bet rule was repeatedly broken.

The player 'felix123' had a pending withdrawal in the casino Fair Go. However, while he was waiting for his withdrawal to be proceed, the casino offered him a 25 AUD voucher. The player accepted this voucher and for this action the casino cancelled his pending withdrawal. The casino is blacklisted due to this kind of practice.

The player "disgusted" had winnings voided for accepting and using a free bonus while having a pending withdrawal. The mediator agreed that using a violation on a current bonus to invalidate historically compliant winnings was non-valid, but said that they had discussed this issue many times previously with the casino and would unfortunately not be able to help.

The player from Australia had their winnings cancelled without further explanation. The issue arose from a misunderstanding regarding the activation of bonuses while having an existing balance. After extensive discussions, the Complaints Team determined that the player had made an honest mistake and should have been treated fairly by the casino. A $500 bonus was ultimately accepted by the player as a resolution, although concerns about high wagering requirements were expressed. The complaint was classified as unresolved, indicating that the casino could have handled the situation better.

The casino has this rule of '...not claiming a bonus while there's a pending payout request' which the player was not aware of. This rule would be fair if it concerned only the bonuses taken subsequently, but should not influence the pending withdrawals. This was not the first time the casino voided pending winnings because of this rule but they refused to change their position.

The player 'btownie' won AUD 2.500 and requested a withdrawal. While the request was still pending the player accepted a new bonus sent by the casino. The casino voided the withdrawal because the player breached the bonus T&C. There was supposed to be a pop-up window saying the withdrawal would be voided if the player accepted the bonus, however, the player was sure there was no such message. The fact that the terms of a new promotion should have no influence on a pending withdrawal was pointed out to the casino but they refused to change their position.

The player requested a self-exclusion and her account was closed. A week later, however, she was able to access her account and play. She made a deposit and lost the money. After she pointed out that they were not supposed to let her play, the casino said she should've sent a filled out form for her self-exclusion request to be complete. They refunded some of the deposits she made after the initial self-exclusion request but only partially and based on the payment method used.

The player from Australia is complaining about having his funds disappeared after he has experienced technical difficulties. The player was offered a bonus from the casino and accepted it. The complaint was resolved.

Adam, a player from Australia, deposited using Bitcoin into the casino, but the money did not reach his account. He contacted the casino support, but the chat was terminated with the information that the player will be contacted in 48 hours.

The player from Mexico had his winnings cancelled to a rule forbidding a redemption of multiple consecutive Free Bonuses. The complaint was closed as resolved as the player successfuly received her winnings.

The player from Australia had encountered a problem with her withdrawal process at Ozwin Casino. The casino had reduced her balance to $102, stating that her winnings were from free spins with a max payout limit, which the player had disputed. She had not been verified at the time but had subsequently sent the required documents for verification. The player had also provided all relevant information and screenshots to the Complaints Team via email for further investigation. The issue was eventually resolved with the player's account being successfully verified by the casino.

The player from Australia has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Oregon has an issue with withdrawal as the casino claims to be emailing him, but no emails are received. Also, the casino is repeatedly asking for a picture of him holding his ID, even after already sending three pictures. Later, the player informed us the the problem with their account verification was resolved on its own, before we contacted the casino, so we closed the complaint as per the player's update.

The player from the US had faced multiple issues while trying to withdraw her winnings from an online casino. She had complied with the casino's request to verify her Bitcoin account, but her account had been locked due to disputed transactions with her bank. Despite having resolved the issue with her bank, the casino had continued to block her from emailing them. She had also claimed to have been locked out of other casino sites due to this issue. After extensive communication with the casino and the Complaints Team, the casino finally verified her account and disputes, and she had been able to withdraw her winnings. The Complaints Team had resolved the issue by mediating between the player and the casino.

The player from the United States was experiencing issues withdrawing from the casino due to ongoing verification. After we contacted the casino, we found out that the delay was caused by the holiday season. Finally, the players's account was verified and the player received his winnings. We closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from the US was experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to ongoing account verification. The complaint was rejected because the player did not respond to our messages and questions. Later, we received an update from the player. He confirmed that the verification was successfully completed and he has already received his disputed funds. The complaint is resolved.

The player was unable to withdraw as his prefered method was not available anymore. Although we have not received any detailed explanation on how the issue was finally resolved, the player confirmed the funds were paid. The complaint is considered resolved.