A Big Candy Casino Review

The player from Indiana had been waiting for her confirmed withdrawal for two weeks, despite the casino advertising a 24-48 hour withdrawal period using Bitcoin. We reached out to the casino, which confirmed the withdrawal was paid on May 20th. The player did not respond to our follow-up inquiries, leading us to close the complaint due to lack of communication.

The player from Australia had accused the casino of charging excessive withdrawal fees and providing poor customer service. His $1000 withdrawal had come with a $106 fee. Despite his concerns, he confirmed that he had received his winnings after a three-week wait. He also mentioned a second successful withdrawal. We clarified the possible reasons for the 'Manager withdrawal' and offered further assistance if needed. However, the player had considered his case closed as he had received his payouts. We marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from New York, who had played in the casino, had requested a withdrawal of $4000. Despite being reassured by the casino that the funds would be sent, one month later the player found the funds had been wiped out and the casino claimed they had mixed up the funds. The player had reached out to us for assistance. After a thorough review of the evidence provided by both parties, we found that the player had indeed mixed her funds, which was against the casino's policy. Due to this, we were unable to assist the player in recovering her winnings. The complaint was subsequently rejected.

The player from Australia had been waiting on a withdrawal for six weeks, well past the promised processing timeframe. The casino returned the funds to the player's account, citing a lack of payment method details and an excuse of high volume of withdrawal requests. We attempted to resolve the issue by contacting the casino, which claimed the payment had been dispatched for processing. However, the player did not respond to follow-up messages, so the complaint was closed due to lack of response.

The player from Australia had requested two withdrawals in February, one of $2,500, which was approved, and one of $1,500 that was still pending. Despite daily attempts to resolve the issue through the chat feature and email, over two months later, she had not received any concrete responses from the casino. We had attempted to gather more information about her account status and the nature of her winnings but received no response. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Australia had received only a part of her winnings, $615 out of $2500, from the casino. The casino had attributed the discrepancy to loyalty bonus conditions, but the player insisted she had fulfilled the necessary wagering requirements. Upon investigation, we found that the casino in question was a VIP room, not a typical online casino, and lacked accessible information about its owner or service provider. This made it impossible for us to mediate as we couldn't establish contact with the casino. Moreover, the casino's right to set maximum withdrawal limits for their bonuses was acknowledged. Consequently, we had to reject the complaint due to these limitations.

The player from Australia had experienced issues getting two pending withdrawals processed in the casino. The withdrawals, one of $816.89 and another for $450.00 had been delayed for over a month despite constant communication with the casino. The player had confirmed he used wire transfer for past withdrawals and there were no active bonuses when he won. However, he did not understand the verification process. We had requested more details and relevant communication between him and the casino, but the player failed to respond. Consequently, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Australia had been waiting for a withdrawal for two weeks. Despite being a verified user and contacting the casino daily, the casino provided her with generic responses or ended the chat. The player was not able to use the bonus options emailed to her. After communicating with the casino, we found that the delay had been due to the need for the player to update her bank details, which the casino had failed to communicate to her. The casino had then asked her to wait another 10 business days for the withdrawal. We had extended the time for the casino to respond to the complaint. We had asked the player for confirmation if the issue was resolved, but the player became unresponsive. Despite extending the time for response by 7 days, the player failed to respond to our messages and questions. As a result, we were unable to further investigate and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Australia, who held a VIP4 status, had submitted multiple withdrawal requests totaling up to her weekly limit of $10,000. Some of the requests had been approved, however, the payment had not been processed. There were also remaining requests still under review, which were exceeding the mentioned delay frame. The player had opted for a wire transfer and completed the verification process. After communication with the Complaints Team, the player agreed to wait an additional three days for the casino to process the payments. Later, the player confirmed that all requests had been approved and she was waiting for the funds to show up in her bank account. Eventually, the player confirmed that the funds had been successfully transferred to her account. With the issue resolved, we closed the complaint.

The player from Australia had an issue with his withdrawal request from 24 months ago, which had been denied due to missing bank details. Despite having provided these details via email and an online form, the funds had been returned to his game account. The casino's consultants had claimed that the bank details were missing. The player's account had been fully verified and he had attempted the withdrawal three times. He hadn't received any alternative withdrawal methods from the casino, nor had they responded to his emails. The casino eventually processed a partial withdrawal, but the player had had to wait over 15 business days. Upon the intervention of the Complaints Team, the casino had approved the withdrawal and the player had received his funds, minus service and bank fees. The issue had then been marked as resolved.

The player from Australia had requested a withdrawal for $1000.58 on 1/02/2024, which had been approved on 6/02/2024. Despite being told that it would take 7-10 business days, he had not received his funds. He had provided evidence of non-receipt and highlighted inconsistencies in the casino's responses. We had facilitated communication between the player and the casino. Eventually, the player had received $944, less than the requested amount due to a $20 fee. Despite the discrepancy, the player had considered the issue resolved, and we had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Florida had a pending withdrawal since December 21st which exceeded the stated 7-10 business days for approval. The player confirmed that his account was fully verified and that he had previously made a deposit and a withdrawal. The winnings were accumulated from a bonus after a deposit had been made. The casino was contacted regarding the delayed payment, but the player received no response. We invited the casino to join the conversation and eventually received a private reply stating the player's request was approved and the payment of 173.08 AUD would be processed within 7-10 business days. Even though we assumed that the issue had been resolved, without a confirmation from the player, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from Australia, after initially succeeding with a $50 free chip and further betting, had been limited to a $100 withdrawal despite his larger winnings. The remaining $1,400 had been marked as 'manager withdrawal approved'. The player had felt cheated, as the total winnings should have been over $10,000. The player had also deposited $30 of his own money during the game, believing that this would secure full payment of his winnings. We had clarified that even if the player deposited real money during the wagering process, the winnings were still subject to the limitations set by the free bonus. The player had confirmed receiving the $100. We couldn't resolve the issue in favor of the player due to the casino's bonus rules, hence the complaint had been rejected.

The player from the US had been awaiting payouts on 49 withdrawal requests from A Big Candy Casino for over a month. Despite the player's account having been confirmed and the maximal cash out limit being AUD 15,000, the casino continued to delay payments citing high request volumes. The player also faced an unusual request for KYC verification from the casino, which he complied with. However, the casino did not respond to our attempts to mediate the situation. After a week of no progress, we closed the complaint as 'unresolved', which negatively affected the casino's rating. The casino had not yet paid out the player's winnings.

An Australian player had initiated a withdrawal from an online casino but was asked to provide proof of legal residency due to a mismatch between their birth country and registered address. The player had provided the requested information, including a screenshot of their credit card used for deposit, but had received no response. The player had discovered that their withdrawal was denied and the funds were returned to their casino account. We contacted the casino for clarification on the delay in the KYC procedure and the denied withdrawal. The casino's representative informed us that the player should have received the payment within 48 hours. However, without the player's confirmation of receiving the payment, we were unable to finalize the resolution and initially had to reject the complaint. Later, the complaint was reopened and was successfully resolved after the player confirmed the receipt of their payment.

The player from Florida requested a withdrawal on October 19th but has not yet received it, exceeding the casino's usual processing time. The player has tried contacting customer support and sent numerous emails to the payment service, but has received no response. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Texas hadn't received a payout from the casino for over ten business days, and his direct emails to the casino's payment department were ignored. After we confirmed his account verification and detailed his repeated attempts to resolve the issue, we had reached out to the casino for their input. Despite the casino's lack of response, the player later confirmed that he finally received his payout, albeit with a $25 transaction fee that the casino withheld. We had marked the complaint as resolved and thanked the player for his cooperation.

The player from Australia had been waiting nearly a month to process a withdrawal request, despite regular contact with support chat. The player's account had already been verified and he had used a bonus to accumulate his winnings. Despite repeated assurances from the casino's support chat, his payout had been delayed and his emails had been largely ignored. We intervened and contacted the casino on behalf of the player. After our intervention, the casino had informed us that the payment would be processed within 48 hours. The player confirmed he received his payment and the issue was successfully resolved.

The player from the US had a delayed withdrawal request from over a month ago. The withdrawal, which included winnings and a verification deposit, did not exceed the maximum cash-out limit set by the casino. The player's account was also verified. The casino team had repeatedly assured the player that the delay was due to a backlog in withdrawal requests. The Complaints Team had intervened and contacted the casino, which resulted in part of the player's winnings being paid out. However, the player had expressed dissatisfaction over a perceived shortfall in the payout. The Complaints Team then clarified that the player's deposit had been returned to the casino account and was available for play or withdrawal after a 1x playthrough. The player did not respond further, leading to the complaint being rejected due to lack of response.

The player from Ohio won a sum of money playing with free coins but the casino refused to pay out, claiming that they had already sent too many bonuses. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from Greece had made several deposits and met the betting requirements, which had led him to request a withdrawal of $2500AUD using bitcoin. Despite successful account verification and inquiries about the delay, 10 business days after his withdrawal request, it remained at the initial stage with no updates. This had been the player's first withdrawal attempt from the casino. Our team had reached out to the casino for clarification but received no response. Due to the casino's lack of a valid license and no affiliation to any ADR service, we had marked the complaint as 'unresolved'.

The player from Michigan is having a withdrawal issue. They won $100 from a bonus, but despite having met the playthrough requirements and then following up for one month, the casino keeps giving excuses without processing the withdrawal. The complaint was rejected due lack of evidence received from the player.

The player from the United States requested a withdrawal three weeks ago. Despite multiple chats with customer service and the issue being escalated, the withdrawal has not been processed. After contacting casino and their affiliates we still weren't able to get a response.

The player from Australia requested two withdrawals over a month ago. Despite daily contact with the casino and being told multiple times that the request has been escalated, it is now 26 business days since the first withdrawal request without any progress. After contacting casino and their affiliates we still weren't able to get a response.