CatCasino Review

The player from Sweden had requested multiple times to close their account at Catcasino through live support, but the casino refused to do so, instead offering bonuses. The player was dissatisfied with the casino's RTP and limited game options and had deposited SEK 6,000. The account was eventually permanently closed. We concluded that the player was responsible for their deposits and playing, and no refund was warranted. The complaint was resolved.

The player from Estonia had raised a concern about the inability to block or exclude his account from a casino, and had questioned its high rating in spite of this. He had claimed that despite his request, the casino had not blocked his account. In response, the casino had stated that they had reviewed the decision and his account was now blocked as per his request. However, the player did not respond to further communication from the complaints team. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Quebec had deposited CAD 50$ to Cat Casino but the credit hadn't appeared in his account. Despite having provided necessary bank evidence, he had kept receiving responses that the transaction was pending. The casino had requested a payment receipt with a timestamp to locate the transaction. After the player had expressed his dissatisfaction, the casino had identified and credited the payment, apologizing for the inconvenience and offering 50 free spins as compensation. The player had then requested for his promotional bonus of 200% and 100 free spins to be updated. The casino had explained that the initial bonus couldn't be technically activated as the player had unsubscribed from it, but they activated a different bonus instead. The issue had eventually been resolved to the player's satisfaction.

The player from Russia, who admitted to having a gambling addiction, had attempted to self-exclude or block his account with Cat Casino but was unsuccessful. Despite numerous requests, the casino frequently offered bonuses and encouraged him to continue playing, which resulted in losses of 400,000 rubles. The player's account was eventually blocked, but the casino did not respond to his request for a refund. The casino later claimed to have compensated the player and confirmed the account blockage, but the player did not confirm this resolution, which led us to reject the complaint due to lack of confirmation.

The player from Finland had used free spins in Cleopatra and had made a €40 deposit. After winning, his balance had reached €237. However, when he attempted to withdraw, the casino had provided unclear information about withdrawal conditions and stated he could only withdraw €107. The player had later clarified the situation with the casino and decided not to pursue the complaint further. The casino had confirmed that the player's account was verified and his bonus had expired, which was why he could not withdraw the full amount. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved' after the player's confirmation.

The player from Romania complains about not receiving a cashback of 10% on his deposit of 1000€, which the casino advertises. Despite qualifying for this offer, the casino's support has not resolved the issue and has provided unsatisfactory service. Casino responded the offer was credited and player later completed wagering of the bonus successfuly. We rejected the complaint however because the player failed to provide a confirmation the issue was resolved.

The player from Finland had deposited money on December 4, 2023, but the funds had not been reflected in the gaming account. The issue had remained unresolved despite repeated contact with the casino's chat support. The player had made three deposits on the same day, two of which were successful while one was not reflected in the casino account. The casino, upon investigation, had stated they did not receive the disputed amount. The player had been asked to provide detailed bank statements highlighting the transactions. However, the player failed to provide the necessary documents for further investigation. The Complaints Team had extended the timer for the player's response, but due to a lack of communication from the player's side, the complaint was eventually rejected.

The player from Austria had deposited 1,500€ via bank transfer just before initiating self-exclusion. He had contacted the casino multiple times to return the deposit but had received no helpful response. The casino had acknowledged the deposit but stated it was not yet visible in the player's account. Eventually, the casino returned the deposit to the player's account. The player had also expressed an intention to sue the casino for other amounts due to the casino allegedly offering illegal services in Austria. However, we had clarified that we do not handle complaints related to licensing regulations and policies. Since the player's deposit was returned, we had deemed the complaint resolved.

The player from British Columbia had experienced issues with a casino game. The player questioned the game's fairness. The casino representative clarified that the player had activated a no-deposit bonus, and wagering was only possible from the real balance. When the player's real balance was exhausted, they were informed that an additional deposit was needed to continue wagering the bonus. We had asked the player to confirm if the explanation was satisfactory but received no response, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Greece had had trouble with registration at the casino due to reported security reasons. She had claimed the casino site was unsafe and unlicensed. We had clarified that the official website of the casino was safe and used HTTPS protocol. We had also confirmed that the casino held a valid and active license. We had advised her to avoid any unofficial or suspicious websites, and recommended checking our list of recommended casinos for alternatives. The complaint had been rejected as there was no valid reason to keep it open.

The player from Austria, who identified as a gambling addict, had claimed to have requested self-exclusion from an online casino, but the casino had continued to accept their deposits. The player had demanded refunds, accusing the casino of exploiting their addiction. The player's daughter had sent the self-exclusion request on their behalf due to the player's psychological distress. The player had insisted that despite a typo in their email address during registration, the casino should have blocked their account immediately after the correction was made. The casino had denied any wrongdoing, stating that the player hadn't made any deposits after the email address correction. Despite multiple requests from the Complaints Team, the player had failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims. Consequently, the complaint had been rejected due to lack of evidence.

The player from Austria has been having issues with withdrawals after switching banks and updating their credit card. Despite providing proof of the previous five cards, they were unable to receive their money because of restrictions on non-EU transactions. The casino refused to pay out through Skrill, citing the most recent deposit method must be the one used for withdrawal. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from Finland is struggling with account verification at CatCasino which is with-holding winnings of €520. The initial passport for verification was expired and the subsequent document, a valid driving license, was rejected by the casino without credible reason, contradicting their terms of service. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Germany managed to register and deposit thousands of euros at a casino, while being self-excluded in an associated casino. The player decided to request a chargeback of his deposits and asked us to close the complaint.

The player from Germany is experiencing difficulties with withdrawals of his winnings in the casino. Without the confirmation from the player the funds were received, we were forced to reject the complaint, since he stopped responding.

The player from Germany requested multiple cashouts. Unfortunately, they weren't received yet. The casino informed us about the situation, but without confirmation from the player, we couldn't close the complaint as resolved.

The player from Lower Saxony has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Mexico would like to change the currency that he has chosen by mistake when registering the account. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Germany tried to activate a bonus, however, the casino accused him of opening more than one account. The casino later informed us that the player did not have any other account, therefore we marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from Austria is dissatisfied with the casino's responsible gambling practices. After closing their account due to a gambling problem their balance wasn't paid out. We ended up closing the complaint as resolved because the player eventually received their funds.

The player from Germany 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 was unable to withdraw his winnings or play as the casino claimed that the player was from a restricted country. Even though the player was offered to make a withdrawal, he eventually spent the balance on games. We ended up rejecting the complaint.

The player is unable to withdrawal his bonus winnings as it is required to make a deposit to do so. The complaint was rejected as the player broke the max bet rule, therefore the complaint is irrelevant.

The player from Canada requested a loss limit but did not receive a response and was denied. Despite providing evidence of miscommunication, the withdrawal requests continued to be declined. The casino ultimately refunded the player a total of 6000 CAD. We communicated with the casino in order to gather evidence and we concluded the amount was appropriate, leading us to mark the complaint as resolved.

The player from Russia encountered issues while trying to deposit 645 rubles into the casino, as his deposit wasn't credited. After the casino's response, the issue was resolved and the deposit was credited to the player's balance. The issue was marked as resolved after the player confirmed that the deposit had been credited.

The player from Hungary reported being scammed by the casino for 600 euros after a withdrawal that had remained unprocessed since September 9th. Despite multiple emails and providing a bank statement, the casino's support had been unresponsive and had sent incorrect tracking numbers, leading the player to feel frustrated and neglected. The issue was resolved when the casino acknowledged that the withdrawal had not been processed by the payment provider and returned the funds to the player's game balance. The player then successfully re-requested the withdrawal, which was processed and paid, resulting in the player receiving the funds.

The player from Germany had been trying to withdraw funds from the casino since July 23, 2024, but all attempts via different methods, including Jeton and Visa Debit, were repeatedly canceled. Despite contacting support multiple times, they were advised to continue trying without a resolution. The casino acknowledged the issue, citing technical difficulties with their payment providers, and confirmed that the player successfully received a withdrawal through Jeton. The complaint was marked as resolved after the player confirmed receipt of the funds.

The player from Finland had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The player had complained about numerous failed attempts to withdraw his winnings using various methods. The casino had suggested the issue might have been related to technical difficulties, such as the player's card being registered in a different country or the player not correctly entering the card number. The casino also suggested the player try using a MasterCard for withdrawal. The player, however, did not have a MasterCard and expressed frustration about the ongoing issues. After extensive communication between the player, the casino, and our team, the player finally confirmed that the withdrawal was successful. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Germany had deposited 50€ and won 500€. However, his attempts to withdraw using a MasterCard had been rejected four times due to allegedly incorrect details. The player had insisted his details were correct and had submitted all necessary documents for KYC verification. The casino had suggested the player clear his browser cache/cookies or try a different payment method. Despite these attempts, the withdrawal had still been canceled. The casino then suggested that the player was entering a non-existent card number, which the player disputed. Eventually, the player had tried to use a friend's card, which led to confusion due to an old card number being used. Ultimately, the player confirmed that the withdrawal had been successful and the funds had arrived in his account. We had closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from British Columbia had an issue with the casino regarding an Interac e-transfer withdrawal. Despite having provided all the necessary banking details, the casino had insisted on a non-existent 20-digit ID banking number and a picture of her bank card, which she hadn't used for the transaction. After the player submitted her complaint and provided all the necessary evidence to us, the casino found her banking information and allowed her to create a withdrawal request. The casino then processed her withdrawal successfully. The player thanked us for our assistance and expressed hope that such a situation would not occur in the future.

The player from Russia experienced issues with a deposit made to the casino, having submitted all necessary receipts. After six hours of waiting, the casino promised a quick resolution but became unresponsive. The player's account was later blocked due to alleged fraudulent activity, which was ultimately found to be unsubstantiated. Following the intervention, the account was unblocked, and the player successfully withdrew funds along with a bonus. Ultimately, the player requested account deletion, which was completed, and the complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Russia had deposited 9000 RUB on October 15, 2024, but the payment was not identified despite completing the transaction. After contacting technical support and providing screenshots via email, the player received no response. Following further communication and the submission of a bank statement, the verification was completed, and the funds were credited to the player's balance.

The player from Ontario experienced difficulties verifying his account to withdraw his winnings of $3800. Despite spending two hours in customer support, the casino insisted on an impossible requirement of providing an account statement from Interac, which did not issue such documents. After further communication and additional verification efforts, the account was finally verified, and the withdrawal was received. The complaint was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Ireland had made an initial deposit of 29 euros after signing up but had not received the funds. The issue was resolved after approximately 10 hours when the money was finally credited to his account. The delay was attributed to the payment provider and not the casino itself. The complaint was closed as 'resolved' following confirmation of the resolution.

The player from Germany had faced multiple rejected withdrawal requests, including a recent €450 attempt, despite being a long-time registered user. While the casino attributed the issues to technical reasons and suggested using a different payment method, the player did not utilize cryptocurrency. The issue was resolved as the player received the payout shortly after the Complaints Team's involvement, although he expressed skepticism about the casino's practices regarding withdrawals. The Complaints Team marked the complaint as 'resolved' and encouraged the player to reach out for future issues.

The player from Germany faced issues with withdrawing two amounts of €450 and €150 from Gama Casino, which had been pending for over 10 hours despite previous quick payouts. After being informed that the withdrawals were approved, the amounts were later canceled, and the player could not find any available withdrawal options. The player later reported that after multiple attempts, the withdrawal option reappeared, and the funds were successfully withdrawn. The casino acknowledged the technical issues and offered a bonus as an apology. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Quebec had been attempting to withdraw funds for two months, but the casino kept canceling the withdrawal despite having all required documents approved. They had communicated via email but had not received a resolution, and the casino had recently changed its website. The issue was resolved after the player repeated the withdrawal request, which was subsequently approved and paid by the casino. The player confirmed the resolution, and the complaint was marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from Hungary faced repeated rejection when attempting to withdraw €450 after winning €1600, despite being fully verified. The support team cited technical issues with the card processor and was unhelpful, refusing to provide alternative withdrawal methods such as crypto or bank transfer. The player later reported that all withdrawal requests had been successfully processed, including a €400 bank transfer and an €800 withdrawal, which were both completed. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Portugal had completed several verification steps for Gama Casino but was later asked to provide a photo of a bank card they had never used, as they had only deposited using Ethereum. Upon further investigation, the casino clarified that the player only needed to confirm their cryptocurrency wallet via email. After following the instructions, the player successfully withdrew their winnings. We closed the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Brazil had been unable to withdraw R$621.80 from Gama Casino. He had deposited via Astro Pay, but the casino hadn't offered Astro Pay for withdrawal, and the alternative method, PIX, had kept returning an error. Despite having communicated with several agents and sent numerous emails, the player hadn't received a satisfactory solution. After our intervention and request for the casino to respond, the player informed us that the casino had resolved the issue. We then marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Finland had encountered an issue with a casino, where despite having deposited and won 3000€ with a welcome bonus and having completed KYC procedures, her withdrawal requests were repeatedly rejected. The casino had claimed the rejections were due to lack of payment method verification. Upon providing further verification of her Skrill account, the player's withdrawals had started processing. This issue had been resolved after the casino confirmed the player's successful verification and ongoing withdrawals according to her account limits. The player had confirmed the resolution and the complaint was dismissed.

The player from Finland had had an issue with GamaCasino and its sister casinos, including CatCasino. She had requested account closure due to gambling addiction on February 4, 2024, but had been allowed to continue playing. The player had claimed her self-exclusion requests were ignored. GamaCasino had denied receiving any such emails. The player had deposited €500 on March 16, 2024, the same day her account was closed. After she provided evidence of her self-exclusion requests and a series of discussions had taken place, the Complaints Team had decided to investigate further. The player had suggested that GamaCasino should return her deposit to resolve the complaint. The issue had been resolved when GamaCasino agreed to refund the full amount of deposits to the player's game balance and the player had confirmed that her issue had been successfully resolved.

The player from Germany had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks before submitting this complaint. Their money hadn't been received yet. The casino initially claimed that the withdrawal had been successful, but due to a technical issue on the payment provider's end, the withdrawal had been cancelled multiple times. After a series of discussions, the casino decided to compensate the player with the withdrawal amount of 1,800 EUR directly to the game balance. The player was then restricted from playing, as the compensation was for withdrawal only. The player confirmed the successful withdrawal, and we marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Austria had faced multiple issues with the withdrawal process from an online casino. The player's withdrawal requests had been repeatedly rejected due to reported issues with their account details. The casino had suggested the player confirm their payment method via email. Despite having done so, the player had continued to experience withdrawal rejections. The casino then identified that the player's bank was rejecting the payment and suggested trying a different payment method. The player had requested to use Skrill for withdrawal, but had to confirm this method first. After a few more complications, the player had finally been able to successfully withdraw via Skrill. The issue had been resolved with the assistance of the Complaints Team.

The player from Germany had won approximately 4800 € but encountered issues while trying to make a withdrawal. Despite having completed the verification process, the player kept receiving notifications about technical difficulties in processing the payment. Multiple interactions with the casino's help chat had not resolved the problem. The casino had suggested the player use a different withdrawal method, however, the player only had a Visa card. The casino then offered to make a manual withdrawal or to withdraw funds to cryptocurrency, but both options were not suitable for the player. Eventually, the casino enabled a "Bank Transfer" option, and the player successfully withdrew the remaining €3900. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Austria, after winning and successfully passing the document verification process, faced technical issues preventing the withdrawal of €1000 in winnings. The player reports consistent errors and unhelpful chat responses. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Austria had encountered issues when trying to withdraw their winnings of 3,300€ from Gama Casino. Despite having completed the full KYC verification, every withdrawal attempt had been cancelled without a clear explanation. After the player reported the issue, we had facilitated a conversation between the player and the casino. The player then received their winnings in two parts, both paid out to a crypto wallet via Tether (USDT). The issue had been successfully resolved.

The player from Greece had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The player's issue had been that his withdrawal requests were consistently cancelled due to "technical reasons". The casino had clarified that the player was attempting to withdraw to a Visa card, whereas their system only allowed withdrawals to MasterCard. The casino had advised the player to verify a new MasterCard for withdrawal. After obtaining a new card and making another withdrawal request, the player confirmed he received his winnings. The issue was successfully resolved.

The player from Austria had managed to turn a no-deposit bonus of 15€ into 150€ at Gama Casino but faced issues withdrawing the winnings due to alleged technical difficulties. Despite attempting various withdrawal methods and making an additional deposit, he had been unsuccessful. However, the issue was finally resolved and he had been able to withdraw his winnings. The Complaints Team had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in their system.

The player from Germany, after being blocked due to gambling addiction on one site, had still been able to register and deposit €2500 in total on Gama Casino, which was under the same management. Despite having brought attention to her gaming addiction, she had received no response, her deposits had been ongoing, and her requests for account termination had not been enforced. The player had contacted Casino Guru's Complaints Team for assistance. After a series of exchanges, the casino had agreed to refund part of the player's deposits. The player had acknowledged the refund but requested additional compensation for her losses. The casino had declined, stating that the deposits were made before the player contacted them about her gambling problem.

The player from Finland deposited a small amount in the casino, with the transactions showing as pending. However, after requesting account closure and later reopening when the deposit was successful, he's unable to access his account. The support agents claim it's blocked by his request, despite him attempting to unblock it numerous times. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

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

The player from Sweden is having issues withdrawing 1300 EUR from the verified account due to reported technical errors causing cancellation and multiple re-requests by the casino. The player later informed us that he received his winnings and the complaint could be closed as resolved.

The player from Austria requested a permanent block of his account from Gama Casino but was allowed to unlock their account, contrary to their initial request. After reopening, the player lost about €1,900 and is now seeking a refund of €1,800. The casino agreed to pay the player a refund. The player confirmed it was received.

The player from Lithuania encountered repeated rejections when trying to withdraw funds despite providing the requested verification documents, including ID, a selfie, and credit card details. He received no response from customer support and was frustrated by the lack of assistance. The issue was resolved after he successfully completed the verification process, enabling him to withdraw his winnings. The Complaints Team marked the complaint as resolved and appreciated his cooperation.

The player from Lithuania faced issues with withdrawing winnings of 1070€ from Onlywin Casino after meeting extensive verification requirements. Despite providing all requested documents and being told his account would be verified, it became blocked, and all funds were forfeited due to alleged submission of falsified documents. He asserted the legitimacy of all provided documentation and expressed frustration with the casino's actions. The Complaints Team facilitated communication between the player and the casino. The Complaints Team recommended conducting a video verification to demonstrate the procedure for downloading the bank statement from the player's account and promptly forwarding it to the casino team in its original format. This approach resulted in a favorable resolution. The matter was settled when the casino reinstated the player's account and refunded the winnings, enabling a successful withdrawal of the funds. The player has confirmed receipt of the winnings.

The player from Belgium reported that his winnings from the live casino Monopoly game were not credited to his account despite winning four times on different days. He contacted the game provider, who confirmed that the bets had been accepted, but Onlywin casino did not provide details or resolve the issue. After the casino communicated with the player, the resolution was reached and the complaint was marked as resolved.