Chipstars Casino Review

The player from Poland had issues with the withdrawal process initially due to additional documentation requirements. After resolving this issue, the casino then banned the player, claiming multiple accounts right after the player initiated a withdrawal. The player denied having multiple accounts. The complaint was rejected because the player did not respond to further messages and questions, preventing further investigation.

The player from Alberta had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting the complaint. The payment hadn't been processed yet. The Complaints Team had advised the player that withdrawal processing could take up to two weeks and might be delayed due to KYC verification or high volume of withdrawal requests. The player later confirmed that the issue had been resolved. Therefore, we marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal but did not receive his winnings, which led him to file a complaint. The Complaints Team had advised him that withdrawals often took time to process, potentially due to KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. They had recommended patience and cooperation with the casino. Subsequently, the player informed the team that he had received his funds, and the issue was successfully resolved. The complaint was then marked as 'resolved' in the system by the Complaints Team.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting the complaint. The payment hadn't been processed yet. Although the player had been assured of next day payment by the VIP manager, he was ignored when the payment was delayed. The casino later confirmed that all pending withdrawals had been processed, attributing the delay to technical issues with their service provider. Despite attempts to confirm receipt of payment, the player did not respond, leading to the closure of the complaint.

The player from Spain had alleged that his winnings were withheld by the casino. He claimed that after increasing his initial deposit of 100 euros to 1400 euros, the casino had requested an ID check upon his withdrawal request. Despite submitting the required documents, the casino accused him of breaking a rule and refused to pay out anything more than his initial deposit. However, it was discovered that the player's issue was related to sports betting. As a result, we were unable to assist with this specific complaint and had to reject it. We had recommended websites that specialize in sports-betting-related disputes to the player.

The player from the UK had experienced a delay in withdrawal from an online casino for over two weeks. The casino had been withholding the funds pending an investigation. Initially, the casino had requested a notarized passport, but later withdrew this request. However, they did not proceed with the withdrawal or offer further communication. The player had claimed the casino was employing delay tactics, asking for numerous verifications and launching an investigation into his sports betting activity. After several exchanges, the casino had confirmed that the player's winnings came from Live Casino and his sportsbook gameplay was negligible, hence the investigation was cut short. The player had been paid, his account had remained open. The player had confirmed the resolution of his issue and expressed satisfaction with the outcome.

The player from Peru had experienced a delay in withdrawal of 460 USD from Chipstars Casino. Despite account verification and repeated contact with the casino, the promised timeline for addressing his concern had passed. The player had stated that his account was under additional verification, and he hadn't used any bonus. Chipstars Casino had responded that the player's account was banned due to a breach of their terms and conditions and decided to refund his deposits. The player had confirmed receiving a partial refund of 215 USD out of his total deposits of 227 USD. The issue had been resolved, and the complaint had been marked as 'RESOLVED'.

A longtime VIP player from Spain had experienced delayed withdrawals and poor communication from an online casino. The casino, which had previously processed payouts within 24 hours, began taking several days and frequently changed the payment method due to insufficient funds. The player also reported unresponsiveness and false promises from the VIP manager. After the player lodged a complaint, the casino resolved the issue by paying the outstanding €2,860. The player confirmed the receipt of the payment and the case was marked as resolved by the complaints team.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting his complaint. Unfortunately, his winnings hadn't been received yet. The Complaints Team had advised him that it was quite usual for withdrawals to take a couple of days or even weeks to get fully processed, possibly due to unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. The player had been advised to be patient and cooperate fully with the casino. The player later confirmed that he had received his payment and acknowledged his need for patience. The issue was then marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting the complaint. The payment hadn't been processed yet. The casino representative had informed that the delay was due to a gameplay check for larger wins and the requested amount was larger than the weekly payout limit. The casino had then paid the withdrawal and the player confirmed the receipt of the payment. We marked this complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Russia stated that his deposit made on March 21st via a bank card through a P2P transfer had not been credited. After the player submitted his complaint, we recommended him to contact his payment provider for a thorough investigation. The casino was also waiting for a response from the payment provider. However, the payment provider later confirmed that the player had provided a doctored proof of deposit, leading the casino to ban the player. Despite the player's request for an extract, the casino had provided valid evidence supporting their claim. Consequently, we had no choice but to reject the player's case.

A player from Spain is having trouble receiving a withdrawal of €1600 via cryptocurrency from the casino despite regular assurances from customer service. The casino has not adhered to their policy of processing crypto withdrawals within 24 hours.

The player from the UK had experienced difficulties with Chipstars casino. Even though the casino stated that his case was resolved and he would receive his deposits back, he had not received his money. The Casino claimed that the player hadn't adequately verified his identity and source of funds. The player expressed extreme distress and urgency in resolving the issue due to financial hardship. We marked the complaint as unresolved, waiting for the regulator's decision, and planned to reopen the complaint once the player provided an official statement from the regulator. Despite the player's claims of being ignored by Chipstars and experiencing financial hardship, the casino confirmed that the player was paid many months ago following the regulator's green light. The complaint was reopened at the casino's request, but the player did not respond to our messages and questions within the extended timeframe. As a result, we had no choice but to reject the complaint, though the player had the option to reopen it in the future.

The player from Spain quickly received smaller winnings from the online casino, but a larger winning of €3500 hasn't been paid out. Despite daily communication attempts with customer service, the player hasn't received any updates or replies to his emails. The complaint was resolved as the player got paid out.

The player from Peru encountered problems with a recent withdrawal request and had been unable to log in to his account. The player had been using the casino since November 6, 2023, and his current balance had been accumulated through betting profits, without the use of any bonuses. The issue was later resolved as the player received his funds and requested the case to be closed. Therefore, we marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

An Austrian player discovered that the online casino he had been gambling on doesn't have a license for Austria. He contacted their VIP Manager to ask about the possibility of getting his deposits returned minus winnings. After a series of delayed responses, they stopped responding and was blocked from their Live support. All of this occurred despite the player being upfront about his location. The complaint was rejected as the player was not obligate for a refund.

The player from Russia struggled with the withdrawal process due to unusual verification requirements, including a notary-certified passport and a one-year income statement. The player later informed us that he received his winnings and the complaint was closed as resolved.

The player from the UK claims to have over EUR18,300 in deposits that have not been refunded by the casino. They argue that the casino, which allegedly doesn't accept UK customers, allowed them to register, deposit, and lose money without once verifying their account. Despite not using a VPN, the player was able to operate from the UK, leading to a request for all transactions to be voided and deposits refunded, which the casino refused. The complaint was rejected as the player was not eligible to receive a refund of all of his deposits.

The player from Lower Saxony has submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. The case was rejected since the player was in affiliate and streamer cooperation with the casino, had special conditions, and we do not handle such cases.

The player from Austria, who self-identified as having a gambling addiction, was able to reopen their account before the end of their self-exclusion period, resulting in monetary loss. The case was rejected since, based on the all information provided, the origin of account closure was different.

The player from Germany expressed dissatisfaction with his experience at the casino, suspecting fraudulent activities and manipulation. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Greece requested a withdrawal on 14.05.2023 which has not been processed for over two months. The casino has ceased communication despite the player's attempts to resolve the issue. Casino has shared evidence of multiple accounts with us therefore we have rejected the complaint.

The player from Slovenia has been blocked after the casino reviewed her changing location and considered it suspicious. We were forced to reject this complaint because the player focused only on sports betting.

The player from Poland has requested withdrawals 10 days prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. We rejected this complaint as it was sports betting related.

The player from United Kingdom has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The player provided incorrect information about the country he lives in, therefore we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from UK tried to send documents to verify his account, but his emails have been undelivered. After passing the KYC the player made a successful withdrawal, therefore we marked the complaint as resolved.