Boo Casino Review

The player from Finland had won at the casino but experienced issues when she tried to withdraw her winnings of EUR 450. Despite multiple attempts at contact, the player had received no response from the casino. However, the issue was later resolved and the player confirmed receipt of her winnings. The Complaints Team then marked the complaint as 'resolved' in the system.

The player from Andorra had reported a delay in her withdrawal process from an online casino since the 4th, despite having confirmed her details. She had submitted the necessary identity verification documents, including ID and card photos, as requested by the casino. The casino had been sending repeated confirmation emails, which had raised her suspicions. We had advised the player to wait for an additional 8 days to allow the casino two full weeks to process the payment. The casino had informed her that withdrawals were processed within 3 to 5 business days after account verification. Eventually, the player confirmed that the casino had processed her payment. The issue had been successfully resolved, and the complaint had been closed in our system.

The player from Finland had experienced issues with withdrawal, even though he had kept detailed records of his wins and games. The casino had questioned the quality and accuracy of the documents he had provided for verification. Despite our efforts to engage with the player and resolve the issue, he did not respond to our messages and inquiries. As a result, we were unable to further investigate and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Finland had complained about her withdrawal being rejected and her winnings nullified. She claimed that the casino hadn't provided valid customer service contact. It appeared she might have violated the casino's max bet rule while wagering a bonus, which is a common industry practice and could have justified the casino's actions. We asked for more information to verify her claim, but she didn't respond. As a result, we couldn't investigate further and had to reject her complaint.

The player from Brazil had requested a withdrawal of 1,000 reais from an online casino. However, the casino had canceled her withdrawal, claiming she had exceeded the bonus's maximum bet. The player had denied the accusation, insisting she had complied with the betting limit. We had asked the player to provide her gaming history to verify her claim. After we received the necessary evidence from the casino, we concluded that the player had indeed breached the maximum bet rule multiple times while playing with the bonus. As a result, the complaint was rejected as unjustified due to the player's violation of the casino's terms and conditions.

The player from Brazil had deposited funds to receive a 75% bonus and free spins at an online casino. After she completed the rollover requirement and won 660 BRL, her withdrawal request was rejected because she had exceeded the maximum bet limit. The player disputed this, arguing that the casino's terms had been unclear and she had believed she was within the betting limits. She also reported having difficulties in contacting customer support. We had asked the player to provide additional information and evidence, including the bonus offer email and her communication with the casino. However, the player did not respond within the given time frame, so we were forced to reject the complaint due to a lack of further information.

The player from British Columbia had an issue with his winnings being confiscated due to allegedly exceeding the max bet, which he had disputed. Despite the casino's claim, the player had insisted he never bet over one dollar and felt he had been treated unfairly. After a series of exchanges and investigations, the casino had admitted to a misunderstanding and agreed to pay out the maximum allowed winnings from the claimed free spins bonus, totaling 95 CAD. The player had accepted this resolution. The casino had then requested additional documents from the player for verification purposes, which he had provided. After the successful completion of the KYC procedure, the casino had confirmed the payout. The player had confirmed receipt of the payout and expressed his gratitude for the resolution of his complaint.

The player from British Columbia had reported issues with Boo Casino, complaining about constant pop-ups that encouraged her to deposit large sums of money. She had alleged game glitches and non-payment of winnings. She had tried to seek help from Malta Gaming Authority and eCOGRA, but hadn't received a satisfactory response. The player had suspected foul play and provided chat evidence. After a series of exchanges, we determined that the player's account had been closed by the casino, but it was unclear whether there was any remaining real money balance on the account. It was also revealed that the player's case was being reviewed by regulatory authorities at that time. As a result, we had closed the complaint, advising the player to contact us if the licensing authorities reached a decision.

The player from Brazil had experienced issues withdrawing funds from the online casino, alleging that the casino invented obstacles to avoid payout. The player claimed that the casino had not given her the opportunity to verify her account and demanded explanations. The casino responded, stating that the player's withdrawal request was declined due to bet amounts exceeding 10% of a bonus amount. The casino argued that these terms and conditions were available for the player to read prior to playing. The player insisted she did not claim any bonus and felt frustrated with the situation. However, the Complaints Team, after reviewing the proofs provided by the casino and the player's own admission of having a bonus before depositing, concluded that the player breached the maximum bet restriction multiple times, thus giving the casino the right to forfeit the winnings. The Complaints Team also confirmed that the player's initial deposit had been restored to her account, and therefore rejected the complaint.

The player from South Africa had had her winnings from free spins at Boo Casino cancelled due to betting more than 10% of the bonus credited. She had claimed that the use of free spins was the same as previous times, when she had successfully withdrawn winnings. We had provided her with the casino's bonus terms and requested her game history for further investigation. However, due to the player's lack of response to our messages and questions, we had been unable to proceed with the investigation or provide potential solutions. The complaint had therefore been rejected, but could be reopened if the player decided to resume communication.

The player from Brazil had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, his winnings hadn't been received yet. After the complaint was submitted, we advised the player to wait for at least 14 days, as it was usual for withdrawals to take some time due to KYC verification or high volume of withdrawal requests. We extended the timer for resolution by 7 days. The player later confirmed that the issue had been resolved and he had received his winnings. Therefore, we marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Peru had used free spins at the Boo Casino, won, and made the required deposit. After meeting all of the playing requirements, he had requested a withdrawal of s/700.00 which was denied without clear violation from the player’s side. All his winnings had been confiscated, leaving only the initial deposit. We had attempted to investigate the issue by asking the player for more details and evidence. However, due to the lack of response from the player, we were unable to proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Ireland is experiencing issues with bonus-related deposits and funds withdrawal. The player claims that the casino refused to rectify a mistaken bonus deposit and now the player has potential winnings of 191.00 from roulette which the casino is refusing to payout. It turned out that there was only one no-deposit bonus used and one mandatory deposit made before the wagering requirement for the winnings earned from the no-deposit bonus in question was met, and there was no mistaken deposit bonus added at all. Based on the details gathered, it seemed the player is likely not entitled to the disputed winnings. However, the complaint was rejected because the player stopped responding to our messages and questions after we tried to clarify the circumstances and further details.

The player from Chile is experiencing issues with account verification, despite submitting the requested documents four times. The casino has since blocked the player's account. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Brazil received a bonus, fulfilled the wagering requirements, and was advised by support that their withdrawal could amount to R$1589. However, their withdrawal was cancelled due to their supposed breach of betting limits, an accusation the player denies. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from Finland won 600e from a bonus but was only able to withdraw 25e. The casino stated that their withdrawal was denied because they wagered more than 10% of the bonus amount. The player believes they should receive around 200e and their requests for clarification have been ignored. The complaint was rejected as the player breached the casino terms by betting over the maximum allowed limit.

The player from Mexico deposited 200 MXN into their account in order to receive 50 free spins from a promotional offer. However, the spins were not credited due to the player having another registered account under a different email. After a closer examination, we ended up rejecting this complaint as unjustified.

The player from Brazil has encountered a delayed payout from the casino. They requested bank documents from the player after winning of 1700 reais from an original deposit of 25 reais. The payout is still pending. Since the casino provided us with the evidence that the player breached the maximum bet rule, we rejected the complaint.

A player from British Columbia has encountered issues with several games not loading after depositing money to access promotional free spins. She has contacted tech support multiple times, but the issues remain unresolved. During the investigation, the casino informed us that they would be closing their operations. As a result, they offered the player a refund which was confirmed received. We closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from Japan has been struggling with withdrawal from the casino. The player's withdrawal request of ¥25000 was accepted but never delivered. The casino requested additional information and deposit in a different system, pushing the player to question the reliability of the casino. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Finland passed KYC and received the first withdrawal, but the subsequent withdrawal of 4000€ is still pending. Despite attempts to contact support by email, there's been no response and the account has been closed without warning. The case was marked as unresolved because we felt that the casino could have managed the situation better.

The player from Ecuador has been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hasn’t been received yet. We contacted the casino and it informed us about requesting additional documentation from the player. Finally, the casino accused the player of using VPN and therefore blocked his account. The casino representative provided us with more evidence showing the player breaching the terms, so we agreed with the final decision of the casino and rejected the complaint.

The player from Mexico submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. We ended up rejecting the complaint because the player stopped cooperating with us and we weren't able to proceed with our investigation.

The player from Brazil requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Brazil submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. We rejected the complaint because the player stopped responding.

The player from Japan was experiencing difficulties withdrawing his funds due to the limited availability of payment methods. The player has received the payment, and the complaint was closed as "resolved".

The player from Brazil is experiencing difficulties passing the verification due to an incorrect date of birth. The player decided she was no longer interested in our help, therefore we closed the complaint.

The player from Canada had his account canceled by the casino. The player tried to withdraw their winnings from a bonus but before it was processed, they asked the casino support to turn the funds into real money and cancel the withdrawal to avoid withdrawing and redepositing the funds. Unfortunately, this was against the casino's T&Cs. We ended up rejecting the complaint because the player stopped responding to our messages and questions.

The player from Mexico had his winnings confiscated due to accusations of breaching the rule about the maximum bet. 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 Poland has been accused of breaching bonus terms by placing single bets greater than the allowed ones. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player's self-exclusion failed as she was able to reopen her account. The original self-exclusion was not valid due to a technical issue. The casino refunded the player's deposits for the erroneously activated self-exclusion period and permanently closed her player account. The process took one week from the moment the casino was informed of the problem. The complaint is resolved.

The player from Canada is dissatisfied with the bonus policy. Since it seems that the player breached the maximum allowed bet and didn't provide any evidence to prove otherwise, we decided to reject this complaint.

The player from the Netherlands has won a significant amount of money. The player would like to increase the limit, since with the current casino's withdrawal limit it would take years to process everything.

The player from Ukraine has been accused of breaching bonus terms by placing a single bet greater than the allowed one. Therefore, the casino confiscated the associated winnings. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Canada has been accused of breaching bonus T&Cs by placing higher single bet than allowed. The player decided he is no longer interested in our help, therefore we rejected the complaint.

The player from Germany tried to self-exclude from the casino. Unfortunately, the enquiry was ignored. Later, it became clear the player did not request a self-exclusion, but rather a permanent account closure. However, as she did not specify that the reason for the closure was her gambling addiction, access to her account was later restored as per her request. Following the player's complaint, the casino decided to provide the player with a partial refund of the disputed deposits. The player's complaint was rejected as 'unjustified'.

The player from Netherlands has been accused of breaching bonus terms by placing a single bet greater than the allowed one. Therefore, his winnings were confiscated. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from South Africa had deposited R50 and won R320 but was unable to access her account the next day due to regional restrictions. Despite having made deposits without issues, the player received no response from support and sought a refund of all deposits if the restriction remained. Although a full refund of all deposits was not possible, the complaint was resolved when the casino confirmed that the player’s remaining balance of R320 was credited back to her account after verifying the necessary documentation.

The player from Mexico experienced a delay in account verification and a pending withdrawal, having already waited for 50 days. Despite having provided additional documents as requested, she was later asked to resubmit notarized documents, which complicated the process. The player eventually uploaded the notarized documents but didn't receive any confirmation from the casino. After the Complaints Team contacted the casino, the player's withdrawal was finally processed and paid in full. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Brazil had won a considerable amount from a bonus and had accumulated a balance of 450 reais. Upon attempting to withdraw, he deposited 30 reais and sent her ID. The casino later voided her winnings, claiming she had exceeded betting limits, even though all bets were at the minimum slot value. The complaint was resolved when the casino acknowledged its error and deposited 320 reais into his account. The player was satisfied with this resolution and no longer wished to pursue the complaint.

The player from Brazil had a pending withdrawal for 50 days. Although the KYC documents had been accepted, the withdrawal was still under review. Support had been unresponsive via email and repetitive on chat. The issue was not resolved because the player had failed to provide valid bank account details for the withdrawal, leading us to reject the complaint due to lack of response. Later the player reopened the complaint and we marked it as resolved after the withdrawal was processed.

The player from Finland had reported an issue with the casino's KYC process while he was trying to withdraw his €55 winnings. He had been asked to provide photographs of two cards used for deposit, one of which was a virtual card through Skrill and the other a terminated physical card. Despite having provided other verification documents, the player had claimed that the casino kept requesting these specific items. The issue was eventually resolved after the player provided extensive information, including bank statements from the past year.

The player from Serbia had his account blocked by the casino when he tried to withdraw winnings. The casino initially cited the sudden unsupported status of Serbia as the reason for the account closure. When the casino was contacted, the Complaints Team was informed that the account block was a mistake and the player's account had been reactivated. The player was then able to submit a withdrawal request. However, the withdrawal request was put on hold because of incomplete KYC verification. After the player had provided the necessary documents, the casino confirmed receipt and proceeded with the withdrawal process. The player confirmed the receipt of his winnings and the casino confirmed that the player could continue playing on their platform. The issue had been resolved satisfactorily.

The player from Finland had faced an issue with the withdrawal of winnings derived from a 'free cash' bonus at an online casino. After reaching a balance of 99€, the casino had voided the winnings due to the bonus being 'expired', although there was no clear indication of it being a bonus or its terms. The casino had acknowledged that their decision to void the winnings due to the bonus expiration clause was not fair to the player, and had agreed to reinstate the player's winnings and process a payout, once the player had completed the required KYC procedure. After the casino had reinstated the winnings, the player had confirmed receipt of the payout, resolving the issue.

The player from Canada had had issues withdrawing $1200 from his account at Galactic Wins Casino. The casino had cancelled his withdrawal request, citing a violation of bonus fund terms and conditions. Despite the player having forfeited the bonus funds, the casino had not responded and his balance had been reduced to $5. After the Complaints Team had intervened, the casino had provided game history and claimed that the player had violated their bonus terms by playing non-allowed games. The player had disputed this, stating he had been using real funds. The casino had agreed to pay out $100, the maximum cash-out for the promotion claimed. The player had been dissatisfied but had accepted the offer due to the casino's low rating and number of open complaints. The payment had been successfully transferred to the player.

The player from Finland had raised a complaint against Galactic Wins Casino, stating that they had limited his payout to 100 euros from his 386 euros win. He had claimed that the casino had justified this by saying he played 'forbidden' games. After discussing the issue with both parties and gathering all the necessary details, we asked them to reconsider their decision because we considered the casino's decision to confiscate the user's winnings unjustified. Subsequently, the casino agreed to return the rest of the player's winnings. The player had confirmed that he received the disputed amount, resolving the issue.

The player from Brazil had been facing difficulties attempting to withdraw winnings from the casino. Despite assurances from the casino that the withdrawal would be processed, the funds had not arrived. After the complaints team's intervention and a series of communications, the player confirmed that she had received her winnings, albeit with a deduction of 358 reais. Consequently, we marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Finland had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, his payout hadn't been received by that time. After he submitted his complaint, he confirmed that he had completed the KYC process and the casino had approved his withdrawal. The player had requested an extension of the complaint timer to 7 days. Later, he notified us that the casino had paid out his winnings. Consequently, we had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from India had signed up with Galacticwins.com and had won Rs. 25,000 INR. When she tried to withdraw her winnings, she was informed that her withdrawal had been cancelled due to betting on non-allowed games. Despite her attempts to contact support, she had received unsatisfactory responses. Upon reviewing the case, we contacted the casino for confirmation. The casino responded by stating that the player had been informed of the Terms and Conditions of the promotion in various ways, including through emails and on the promotion page. They further confirmed that the player had placed bets on Live Casino while her wager requirement was still active, which led to the decline of her withdrawal request. We had suggested that the casino should restrict games that cannot be played with a bonus at the software level to avoid such issues. The player had proposed a compromise, asking the casino to deduct winnings related to non-allowed games and reinstate the remaining winnings. As a goodwill gesture, the casino had agreed to pay the maximum cash-out amount of Rs. 5,000 INR as per the bonus terms and conditions. The player had accepted this resolution, and the complaint had been marked as resolved.

The player from Japan reports a month-long delay in withdrawal from the casino. Despite assurances that a transaction would be completed, the withdrawal is still not processed. This is the second such delay that the player has encountered. Since the casino confirmed issues with the payment provider had been fixed and the funds successfully transferred to the player, we closed the case as resolved.

The player from Japan requested a withdrawal of $168 via bank transfer but was asked to try to withdraw using different payment methods. The player confirmed that after he deposited 5 dollars to the casino he was able to withdraw sucessfully.

The player from Finland waited five days for his account to be verified. After submitting this complaint, the verification was successful. However, the player received a message from the casino that his winnings were voided because he breached the maximum bet rule when playing with a bonus. Although the player did breach the max bet rule on one occasion, we were able to help find a compromise, and the casino made a decent compensation offer that the player accepted. The player confirmed that the complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Ecuador requested a withdrawal more than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, the winnings haven’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from South Africa is experiencing difficulties withdrawing her winnings due to ongoing verification. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from South Africa has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Japan is experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to ongoing verification. After our intervention, we were able to help the player to get their winnings. The player confirmed they received the funds in the end. The Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player's dissatisfied with his bonus as he claims that his free spins should have a different value. The casino responded and stated that the player was correct, and that they were attempting to solve the issue which was caused by a technical problem. In the meantime, the casino offered the player a cash bonus alternative so that they did not have to wait any longer. The player declined this offer, and so it was agreed that the player's deposit would be returned to them instead. Once the deposit had been received, the complaint was resolved.

The player from South Africa has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from South Africa requested a withdrawal, but it has not been processed. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Finland was informed that her winnings were confiscated because she played a restricted game while having an active bonus. After a discussion with the casino, the player's winnings were refunded and the issue was resolved.

The player from Finland reported that the casino was not paying out winnings. Additionally, the customer service was extremely slow and often unreachable. The player confirmed he had passed the identification process and eventually received his winnings after persistent efforts. The issue was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Brazil had requested a withdrawal on 6/12, but the transfer was not completed. Despite sending emails to support, there was no response. The casino initially rejected the withdrawal due to bets exceeding the allowed limit under bonus terms. After reviewing the game logs and considering the player's long-term engagement and potential genuine mistake, the casino reinstated her winnings and processed the withdrawal. The player confirmed receipt of the funds, resolving the issue.

The player from New Zealand had successfully met the wagering requirements for a bonus and requested a $430 withdrawal. However, the withdrawal was denied, citing a max free spins limit of $100, and the player did not receive any funds. Due to frustration, the player closed the account and was unable to access it to retrieve their full transaction history. After contacting the casino, it was confirmed that the player's winnings were incorrectly processed, and the remaining $330 was reinstated and paid to the player. The issue was resolved satisfactorily, and the player confirmed receipt of the funds.

The player from Chile had had her winnings of 522 EUR confiscated from the online casino due to allegedly placing equal, zero, or low margin bets. She had insisted that she had only played two games with consistent 1 EUR bets. The player's account had been verified and she had had a Gold VIP level status. After a series of communication and provision of betting history, the casino had admitted their error and decided to reinstate the player's winnings. The issue had been marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from South Africa had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks before he contacted us. The winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The player initially believed the online casino was a scam and had requested to be blocked from the site. However, he later decided to proceed with the case. The casino had acknowledged a delay in processing the withdrawal due to issues with the player's deposit method and KYC verification. After a series of exchanges, the casino had confirmed that the player's withdrawal of 1000 ZAR was successfully paid. The player had confirmed receipt of his winnings and had expressed gratitude for our assistance in resolving the issue.

The player from Canada had deposited in Mr Fortune Casino to avail 100 free spins for the game 'Big Bass - Float My Boat'. After depositing, she was informed by a support agent that the free spins would have to be for a different game due to issues with the original one. Despite the player's insistence that she had opted for the promotion, the casino had maintained that the deposit was credited directly to her account and not through a promotion. After several exchanges with the casino's Complaints Team, the player had accepted an alternative offer for a different game. We had then marked the complaint as 'resolved' and adjusted the disputed amount from $40 to $5.

The player from Chile had deposited funds, won €872, and requested a withdrawal but then canceled it to withdraw a larger amount. The casino allegedly invalidated all winnings over €100, stating that they had been accumulated with the use of a bonus. The player insisted that the winnings were from her own funds, not bonus money, and asked for the recovery of her remaining winnings. After a series of exchanges between the player, the Complaints Team, and the casino, the casino decided to reinstate the player's winnings of €840. The player confirmed the receipt of her winnings and expressed her gratitude for the resolution of her complaint.

The player from Japan faced issues withdrawing winnings after meeting wagering requirements from free spins. The player had uploaded KYC documents and could only withdraw via bank despite having deposited with StickPay. Due to poor communication, the withdrawal process was delayed. The issue was resolved when the casino confirmed that the player's verification documents had been approved and the payment was successfully processed on August 28th. The player expressed gratitude for the assistance received in resolving the matter.

The player from Finland had made 24 deposits at bCasino and eventually won €200. Despite having a fully verified account, the player was still waiting for the payment, suspecting that bCasino was unwilling to pay. The player reported wagering €1460 with a €10 bonus and faced unresponsive support. The issue was resolved, and the complaint was marked as 'resolved' by us.

The player from Brazil had used various free spins bonuses offered by the casino and was able to increase her winnings to 1,370 BRL. Despite attempting to make a withdrawal of 100 BRL from her balance, her balance was reset to zero the following day. The casino initially voided the player's winnings due to a breach of bonus terms by placing bets higher than allowed. However, after our intervention, the casino reconsidered and agreed to reinstate 500 BRL of the player's winnings, which was the maximum withdrawal cap for the bonus used. The player confirmed receiving the funds after completing the KYC verification process.

The player from Mexico had faced issues with bonus rules and withdrawal of winnings at an online casino. After he attempted a withdrawal, the casino had deducted his bonus balance and denied further withdrawals, citing a violation of bonus rules. The player's attempts to contact the casino's complaint email had been unsuccessful. The casino later explained that the player had exceeded the maximum bet limit, which led to the winnings being voided. However, considering that this breach had been unintentional, the casino offered to reinstate the player's winnings of 1500 MXN and process a payout of 1300 MXN once the player completed the KYC verification process. The player agreed to this, completed the verification process, and confirmed that he had received the payout. The issue was then marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Brazil had faced difficulties withdrawing winnings of 304 reais. The casino had repeatedly requested multiple proofs for his account and deposits. The player had been frustrated due to the unavailability of the payout option via Pix, despite the casino accepting payments through it. After an extended back-and-forth with the casino, the player was eventually been able to receive his payout.

The player from Brazil had won R$ 3,380 and had met the rollover requirement. However, despite having transferred the winnings to his bank account four days prior, he had not received the funds. The player had attempted to contact the casino via chat but had received no response. After reviewing the case, we contacted the casino for clarification. The casino initially declined the withdrawal due to irregular play, but after further review, offered to pay the maximum winnings for the bonus the player had claimed (R$ 500). The player accepted this offer, and we marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from Brazil had won 72 reais from free spins and had completed the required rollover. Despite having followed the rules, his withdrawal request for 100 reais was not addressed. The player had previously made deposits at the casino and had a verified account. The player later confirmed that he had received the 100 reais and an additional 412 reais he had requested. We had concluded the case as resolved after the player confirmed receipt of his winnings.

The player from Canada was looking to withdraw winnings of $1,200. The process was delayed for different reasons, from an issue of differing addresses, to blurry ID. We contacted the casino and found out that the player was asked to provide the copy of a credit card which turned out to be a prepaid card, and the player had destroyed it. Nonetheless, the casino approved the withdrawal request later and the player confirmed receiving the money, therefore we closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from Brazil has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Their money hasn’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.