Snai Casino Review

The player from Italy had opened a Snai account with his nephew, won a significant amount through sports betting, and then had his account suspended under Article 14. Despite multiple attempts to contact Snai via email, phone, and in person, he did not receive any responses. We were unable to assist as the complaint pertained solely to sports betting, an area outside our expertise. The complaint was rejected.

The player from Italy reported that their Snai account had been blocked due to Article 14 and was seeking assistance to resolve the issue. The player confirmed a balance of 13 euros and stated that the account had been verified for years. Despite multiple requests, the player failed to provide the necessary email communication with the casino. Consequently, we were unable to investigate further, and the complaint was rejected.

The player from Italy had a verified account for years and had recently won, partially withdrawing the winnings. However, the account was suddenly blocked under Law 14 for about 180 days without any apparent reason. The player mainly played slots without using bonuses. The Complaints Team contacted the casino to inquire about the suspension and requested details. The casino unblocked the player's account, resolving the issue.

The player from Italy had Article 14 applied to her account without explanation. Despite sending several emails requesting account closure and funds transfer, Snai did not respond or provide updates. We attempted to contact the casino multiple times but received no response. The complaint was marked as 'unresolved' due to the casino's lack of cooperation. The player was advised to contact the ADM Gaming Authority for further assistance.

The player from Italy had their account suspended in February due to unclear technical reasons posed by the casino. The casino was unresponsive to the player's requests for payment of winnings. Despite attempts to contact the casino for clarification and resolution, no response was received. Consequently, we closed the complaint as 'unresolved.'

The player from Italy reported that their account had been unexpectedly suspended without any explanation or request for documents, and their funds were still being retained in the account. Despite multiple attempts to contact the casino, they received no response. As a result, the complaint was marked as 'unresolved' due to the casino's lack of cooperation. It was recommended that the player contact the ADM Gaming Authority for further assistance. The complaint was reopened, and the issue may have been resolved, but the player stopped responding and the complaint was closed as "rejected".

The player from Italy faced account suspension at a casino without a clear explanation after betting. The player sought assistance on how to withdraw funds from the account. We attempted to mediate by contacting the casino for more information and evidence, but the casino failed to respond adequately. Consequently, the complaint was closed as unresolved due to the lack of cooperation from the casino.

The Italian player had reported that after he deposited 15 euros at the casino, his account was suspended under Article 14 without any explanation from the casino. The player had also mentioned that he had never used any bonus and did not have any other accounts at the casino. Despite multiple emails, the casino did not respond to his queries. The casino had reinstated the player's account, resolving the issue.

An Italian player had found his Snai account blocked due to an alleged violation of 'Article 14'. He was seeking assistance to understand and resolve the issue. The player's account had been open for over a week and he had a pending withdrawal request of €65 and a balance of €15. The casino had not responded to his email. We contacted the casino asking for an explanation and any relevant evidence. The casino later reactivated the player's account and he was able to withdraw his money. The player had confirmed the receipt of his payment and the issue had been marked as resolved.

The player from Italy had requested account closure and a balance refund. The casino had initiated the procedure on December 7th, but as of January 29th, no further communication had been received, despite the player's emails. The player had claimed to have around 700 euros in his account at the time of suspension. He had also provided a screenshot of the email from the casino regarding the account suspension. The Complaints Team had reached out to the casino for clarification and was informed that the player's account was under internal investigation, which could last up to 180 days. As a result, the Complaints Team could not assist further and the complaint was rejected.

The player from Italy reported that Snai had blocked his account for uncertain reasons. He mentioned having opened and closed his account multiple times, and was now seeking resolution directly from Snai. The player confirmed that Snai had not withheld any funds. We had informed the player that without any held funds, we could not compel the casino to allow him to open an account. We suggested the player to consider other casinos and due to the circumstances, we had to reject his complaint.

The player from Italy had his account suspended and had been trying to retrieve his funds for two months without any response from the casino. He claimed he did not place any bets after depositing the money. The player's account was reportedly under investigation as per Article 14, which allowed an account to be suspended for up to 180 days. Despite our repeated attempts to engage the casino in resolving the issue, they provided no clear explanation or timeline for the investigation. As a result, we closed the complaint as 'unresolved' and advised the player to contact the Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli, Italy's gambling authority.

The player from Italy had her account suspended under Article 14, and the casino had not been responding to her payment requests. She had played various games without using any bonuses and had €100 held in her account. The casino had suspended her account for technical checks, which could have lasted up to 180 days. Despite our team's repeated attempts to contact the casino, there had been no clear explanation or estimated duration for the investigation. We had advised the player to contact the Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli (ADM) for further assistance. The case was closed as 'unresolved' due to the lack of response from the casino.

An Italian player attempted to withdraw 580 euros. The next day, the online casino suspended her account for up to 180 days due to technical verifications, halting all operations including deposits and withdrawals. We rejected this complaint as it was sports betting related.

The player from Italy experienced account blockage at Snai casino for over two months without receiving any explanation. The player either wants access to the gaming account restored or the account closed and winnings refunded. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from Italy has issues withdrawing funds after his account was suspended without any explanation. The casino has not responded to the player's emails. The player fears that information shared with another casino, bwin, may be influencing the situation. We ended up closing the complaint as ‘unresolved’ for now because there is insufficient evidence to clearly justify the casino's decision. We will further investigate the case and update the status once there is any new sufficient evidence provided by the casino

The player from Italy had been blocked from his online casino account without explanation, with €1,900 of his funds held in the account. He had used the account regularly for about 8 months, primarily for football betting and slots. The account had been blocked in March and his attempts to communicate with the casino via email and certified mail had been ignored. The player had wanted his account unblocked or closed and his money returned. We had contacted the casino for clarification and extended the complaint timer for further investigation. However, despite our efforts, the casino had still been awaiting a report from the game provider. Despite continuous communication with the casino, the Complaints Team had been unable to resolve the issue due to the casino's ongoing wait for a report from the game provider. The issue remained unresolved and the player had been advised to submit an official complaint to Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli (ADM).

The player's account got blocked for unknown reason. The casino responded and explained that the player's account was under investigation and that this could last for up to 180 days. The casino was unable to provide any further information until the investigation reached a conclusion. After the time period stated by the casino had expired, they were unfortunately still unable to provide any further insight and the player's account remained blocked. Without any explanation from the casino, the complaint was closed as 'unresolved' for the time being.

The player's account had been blocked by Snai Casino for unknown reasons. He had played with his own money and his account had been verified but was later suspended. The casino had cited article 14 for the suspension, which involved technical checks, inhibiting all operations including deposits and withdrawals. The Complaints Team had investigated the case and discovered that the casino was undergoing a thorough KYC and AML check which could have taken up to 180 days. Despite continuous communication with the casino, the Complaints Team had been unable to resolve the issue due to the casino's ongoing wait for a report from the game provider. The issue remained unresolved and the player had been advised to submit an official complaint to Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli (ADM).

The player from Italy had struggled with unresponsive customer service at her online casino. Despite having provided the required documents for account identification, she had been left in the dark about the completion of the process. Additionally, she had not received the promised welcome bonus. However, after the intervention of our team, the casino sent her a link to submit her documents and credited her account with the €55 welcome bonus. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved', although we noted the player's continued dissatisfaction with the casino's customer support.