BitBetWin Casino review

The player from the US had won a bonus of $1,000 and requested a withdrawal. Although the first withdrawal was accepted, it was put on hold due to platform issues and fraud checks. The casino eventually released $250, but another withdrawal request was put on hold for verification. The player complied, but it was rejected, leaving $700 missing from the account. We regret to inform that the complaint was rejected due to the lack of response from the player regarding our messages and questions, making further investigation impossible.

The player from California 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 at least 14 days after requesting their withdrawals before submitting a complaint. We extended the timer by 7 days for the player to respond. However, due to the lack of response from the player, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from California had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks before contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The player had claimed that the casino refused to process her withdrawal and her request was denied. We had requested more information from the player and found out that the casino in question was a social casino. Unfortunately, we were unable to mediate complaints about social casinos, hence the complaint was rejected.

The player from the United States had won $101.00 on a game using a complimentary bonus. However, when she attempted to withdraw her winnings, she was informed that the platform was no longer supported. In response to her complaint, we had clarified that we could have assisted if her winnings were from real money or a deposit bonus. However, since her winnings were from a free bonus, we were unable to proceed with the case. The player's complaint was ultimately rejected due to these circumstances.

The player from California had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, her payout hadn't 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 could have been caused by unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. The team had extended the response time by 7 days, however, the player did not respond to their messages. As a result, the complaint was rejected due to the lack of response from the player.

The player from the United States had faced issues with altered game results and double charges for bets on the online casino website. The player had provided videos as evidence and mentioned that the casino had stopped responding to his requests for game logs. Despite our team's efforts to engage the casino in resolving the issue, the casino had failed to respond. Due to the casino operating without a valid license and not referring to any ADR service, we were unable to escalate the issue to a gaming authority. We had marked the complaint as 'unresolved', which may have negatively affected the casino's rating. We advised the player to choose casinos based on reviews and ratings in the future to avoid similar situations.

The player from Louisiana won on his daily spin, but his withdrawal attempts have been continuously paused due to multiple rounds of verification. They've sent in 3 different photos for verification 7 times, but to no avail. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from the United States had reported a game error in which her potential winnings of $2,000 suddenly changed to $2. She had provided the Complaints Team with screenshots and email conversations with the casino's customer support. Despite this, the casino's investigation had found no discrepancies or technical issues. The Complaints Team had explained the possibility of misleading graphics in games and the improbability of a winning amount differing from the balance, as these calculations were performed by software. Due to a lack of substantial evidence supporting the player's claim, we were unable to negotiate on her behalf and had to reject the complaint as unjustified.