Black Label Casino Review

The player from the UK had issues with a casino withholding her winnings of £840 due to alleged irregular play. This included cancelling a withdrawal and exceeding the maximum bet limit, according to the casino. The player denied using any promotional offers and had been in constant communication with the casino regarding the issue. However, the casino maintained that the player breached their maximum bet rule, thus leading to the cancellation of her withdrawal. Despite our intervention and recommendation for the casino to pay the player, the casino insisted on adhering to its terms and conditions. As a result, we marked the complaint as 'unresolved'.

The player from the United Kingdom had unsuccessfully attempted to withdraw €700 in winnings. The casino had claimed that a €11.25 spin exceeded their betting regulations and only refunded €27 into the player's account. The player had argued that it was an innocent mistake. We, the Complaints Team, had communicated with the casino and the player to understand the situation. The casino had maintained its stance citing a breach of their terms and conditions. We had suggested that the casino might reconsider its approach considering the player's bet could have been a genuine mistake. However, the casino had chosen not to change its decision. As a result, we marked the complaint as 'unresolved'. The casino operates without a valid license and didn't refer to any ADR service, leaving no gaming authority for the player to turn to.

The player from the UK had won 1,500 euros on a game, Lady Fortune, with a 1 euro bet. The casino had refused to honor the win, citing a breach of terms and conditions, and asserted that the player had placed two additional 100 euro bets, which the player denied. The player had been unable to provide a complete game history due to its removal by the casino. The casino had provided us with the game history, which had confirmed the player's overbets. Despite the player's insistence that she had only made 1 euro bets and her request for the casino to honor her winnings before the alleged overbets, we had concluded that they could not assist further as the winnings were canceled due to the violation of bonus conditions. The complaint was rejected.

The player complained about the casino removing all of his winnings, leaving only his initial deposit. As it turned out, it was due to the casino enforcing a maximum bet limitation on a non-bonus play, which is considered against EU consumer law.

The player complained about the casino paying out only about half of his winnings, and cancelled the rest due to player's breach of maximum bet. However, enforcing bet limits on a non bonus play is considered against EU consumer law.

The player from the United Kingdom is complaining about the lengthy and complicated verification process. After a closer examination, we ended up rejecting this complaint as there is sufficient evidence the player has breached the casino's terms and conditions.

The player from the UK has been accused of breaching the maximum allowed bet. As the maximum bet rule applies to real money play, we have advised the casino to pay the player's winnings, however the casino decided to stick with their terms and conditions. We were forced to close the complaint as unresolved.

The player from the UK placed bets of more than 30% of her last deposit and the casino confiscated her winnings. In spite of our arguments, the casino didn't change its decision to confiscate the player's winnings. We ended up closing the complaint as ‘unresolved’ because the casino's decision is against our Fair Gambling Codex.

The player's winnings were cancelled for breaching bonus terms. The complaint was closed as unjustified because the player violated the maximum bet amount limit while playing with bonus money. The casino acted correctly and within its rules.