Alphabook Casino Review

The player from Austria won 2700€ at Alphabookbet. After verification, her withdrawal was rejected and she was advised to withdraw in 250€ increments. She is concerned this will delay the process and she may lose her winnings.

The player from Bulgaria won 4000 Euros last year, of which only 1070 Euros have been paid out in cryptocurrency. Despite this, withdrawals in excess of 500 Euros using the cryptocurrency have been rejected and the casino indicated a limit of 200 Euros per transaction. The player has pending 3000 Euros in their casino account.

The player from Brazil had faced issues with Alphabook Casino, as he was unable to withdraw his winnings. After several successful deposits and account verification, the casino had banned his account due to allegations of owning multiple accounts. The player's son, son's wife, and stepson also had accounts, but they lived separately. The player, being 73 years old, required his son's assistance to play. However, we found that the player and his son had used the same device to access their separate accounts, a violation of most online casino terms. As a result, we were unable to assist further and the complaint had been rejected.

The player from Finland had expressed dissatisfaction due to constant game disconnections and lack of winnings, which led him to request the closure of his casino account. We had advised him on the process of account closure as per the casino's terms and conditions and asked for further information regarding his account balance and his communication with the casino's customer support. However, the player did not respond to our inquiries within the extended timeframe of 7 days. Consequently, we were unable to proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Greece had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, his winnings hadn't been received yet. After the Complaints Team advised him to wait for at least 14 days for the withdrawal process, the player confirmed that he had received his winnings. As a result, the issue was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Japan claims that their account was frozen when they attempted to withdraw funds. The casino reportedly confiscated winnings from other players citing bonus abuse, but no specific criteria exist in the terms of service. The player insists on a rightful allowance for balance withdrawal.

The player from Germany hadn't had any issues placing bets and verifying her account with Alphabookbet, including multiple withdrawals. However, after she won 2340 euros from a casino bonus, her withdrawal request had taken over two weeks. Despite assurances from support, her account was then closed and her winnings were forfeited without an explicit explanation. The casino later claimed that the player had been suspected of bonus abuse. After a series of exchanges between the player, the casino, and the Complaints Team, the casino had decided to refund the player and unlock her account. However, the player did not confirm that she received the refund, leading to the complaint being rejected due to lack of response.

The player from Japan had reported repeated denials of withdrawal requests without any explanation from the casino. The player had last successfully withdrawn on December 18 and had used a bonus but had met the wagering requirements. The casino had instructed him to make withdrawals in USDC ERCs of $1000 each, which he had complied with but was still denied. Despite multiple attempts to resolve the issue with the casino's customer support and the intervention of the complaints team, the casino had not responded. The issue had remained unresolved, and the player had been advised to contact the Gaming Curacao Authority for further assistance. The complaint was reopened upon receiving information that the player's funds had been paid out, but the player had denied receiving any communication or the disputed amount. The player's account was then blocked by the casino due to alleged misuse of the bonus, and the player had filed another complaint. The issue had remained unresolved.

An Australian player had experienced a month's delay in withdrawal at a casino. Despite being fully verified, they had encountered constant rejections for unclear reasons and had been given numerous excuses including payment provider problems and currency issues. The player had attempted to withdraw winnings via cryptocurrency, as suggested by the casino, but these attempts were also rejected. The casino had claimed the player engaged in bonus abuse, which the player denied. The casino then removed the remaining balance from the player's account. The casino was asked to provide evidence of the alleged bonus abuse, which they eventually did. Upon reviewing the evidence, we found that the player had indeed gained an unfair advantage, albeit unintentionally. As a result, the player's complaint was deemed unjustified and rejected.