The player from Germany faced account issues at BiggerZ Casino after withdrawing €3000, which was subsequently canceled without explanation due to claims of a duplicate account. Despite submitting the requested documentation, his account showed only the initial deposit remaining, and he learned that all winnings had been canceled. We explained that the casino's suspicion was based on the technical link created when the account was accessed from a device also used by another BiggerZ player, which was considered a violation of the casino’s terms prohibiting shared devices to prevent bonus abuse. The player’s argument that no account sharing or collaboration had occurred was acknowledged, but the shared device connection was deemed sufficient grounds for the casino’s decision. Consequently, we did not challenge the cancellation and advised the player to withdraw the remaining deposit balance.
BiggerZ Casino - Player's winnings have been confiscated.
Unjustified complaint
Amount: €2,700
BiggerZ Casino
Safety Index:HighCase summary
Translation
I made a deposit of approximately €300 (1304 TRX) at Biggerz Casino using TRX. I won while playing and withdrew approximately €3000 (12857 TRX). On February 9, 2026, this withdrawal was canceled without explanation and with a reference to customer support.
Upon inquiry, I was told that my account was supposedly a duplicate and therefore temporarily blocked from February 9, 2026. This is incorrect; I have never played at BiggerZ casino before.
In the chat, I was then informed that I could submit documents, including "video evidence" (a video in which I was allowed to hold up a piece of paper and speak into the camera – outrageous, by the way!), to prove that I wasn't a duplicate of another player. I complied with this request and submitted the documents.
Several days have passed without any activity, and since today, February 13, 2026, I can log into my account again. However, instead of the 12,857 TRX, only the original 1,304 TRX (the amount of my deposit) remain in the account. Upon inquiring in the chat, I was assured that all winnings had been canceled and that I should now simply withdraw my deposit.
The behavior of BiggerZ Casino is outrageous on every level. First, they leave me waiting for days without any information after my account is blocked for no reason, and then they cancel all my winnings!!
Please help!
Important notice:
Casino Guru will never ask for payments or access to your accounts to complete KYC. If someone claims to be from Casino Guru and does that, do not share any information.
We only contact players through this official complaint thread or via @casino.guru e-mail addresses. Always check the sender’s domain and verify your complaint resolver’s e-mail address by clicking on their avatar visible inside the official complaint thread.
If anything seems suspicious, contact us directly.
Stay safe.
Dear gandhi1988,
Thank you very much for submitting your complaint. I’m sorry to hear about the cancellation of your winnings and the confusion surrounding the duplicate account accusation.
To better understand the situation and assess how we can assist you, I would like to ask you a few clarifying questions:
- When exactly did you create your account at BiggerZ Casino?
- Have you ever registered at this casino before using any other email address, phone number, crypto wallet, or personal details?
- Are you sharing your device, IP address, or internet connection with anyone who might also have an account at this casino?
Alternatively, you may forward all documentation to petronela.k@casino.guru, and we will attach it to your case.
It is important for us to review the casino’s exact justification and any evidence they rely on when labeling your account as a duplicate. Confiscation of winnings due to alleged multi-accounting must be properly supported, and we need to carefully examine the timeline and communication before proceeding further. Your cooperation in providing these details will help us investigate and work towards a resolution.
Once we receive the additional information, we will be in a position to contact the casino and request a detailed explanation on your behalf.
I hope we will be able to help you to resolve this issue as soon as possible.
Thank you in advance for your reply.
Best regards,
Petronela
TranslationHello Petronela,
Thank you so much for your support!
When exactly did you create your account at BiggerZ Casino?
=> That was probably on February 7, 2026.
Have you ever previously registered with this casino using a different email address, phone number, crypto wallet, or other personal information?
=> No, I had never registered with Biggerz before.
Are you sharing your device, IP address, or internet connection with someone who might also have an account at this casino?
=> Not exactly, no. However, I did spend some time at a friend's house while playing, who also plays at casinos and, as far as I know, also used to have an account with Biggerz.
Please let me know if I can provide any further information.
Thanks and regards
Hi gandhi1988,
Thank you again for your clarification.
I would like to ask you a few additional important questions to better assess the situation:
- Which specific games did you play when generating the winnings (please specify game titles if possible)?
- While you were at your friend’s house, were you both playing at the same time?
- If yes, were you each using your own separate device (your own phone/laptop), or did you use the same device at any point?
- Were the canceled winnings generated from bonus funds or purely from your real-money deposit?
This information is very important, as duplicate account flags are often connected to shared IP addresses, device usage, or bonus-related terms.
Please provide as much detail as possible so we can proceed correctly.
TranslationHello Petronela,
Which games exactly were you playing when you won the money (please specify the game titles if possible)?
=> I can't see the exact titles anymore, but I usually play mainly games from Pragmatic Play and Play'n GO, with a maximum stake of €4 per spin. Most likely, the games were: Big Bass Boxing, Tome of Madness, and Lava Balls, as well as possibly a few others (as I said, the stake was never more than €4 per spin).
Did you both play at the same time when you were at your friend's house?
=> No, we definitely didn't both play at the same time. What I can't completely rule out is that one login was active on two devices simultaneously.
If so, did you use your own device (your own phone/laptop) each time, or did you use the same device at times?
=> As a rule, I use my own device, but on this particular evening I believe I also used my friend's device.
Did the cancelled winnings come from bonus funds or exclusively from your real money deposit?
=> A bonus was credited upon deposit, which I fully wagered according to the terms and conditions. This should have been 150% or approximately 1950 TRX.
Many thanks and best regards
TranslationSorry, I found where I can look that up after all 🙂
The games were: Big Bass Boxing, Tome of Madness, Sweet Alchemy, and Bandit Megaways.
Dear gandhi1988,
Thank you for your detailed clarification.
I need to be very transparent with you here. Sharing a device, IP address, or internet connection with another player who has (or had) an account at the same casino is a serious issue. There are no exceptions to this rule in the online gambling industry. Even if you did not play at the same time, even if the intention was innocent, and even if it only happened once, it is still considered a high-risk activity from the casino’s perspective.
Using your friend’s device — especially when that friend also has or had a Biggerz account — is something that will not be accepted by virtually any casino. This is one of the most common triggers for duplicate account detection systems. When combined with a deposit bonus, the situation becomes even more sensitive, as casinos apply very strict anti-abuse measures in bonus-related play.
From what you described:
- You used a deposit bonus.
- You logged in from a location where another Biggerz player had played.
- You likely used your friend’s device at least once.
These factors together make the casino’s duplicate-account suspicion understandable from a compliance standpoint.
At this stage, I must advise you realistically that the strongest and safest option would be to withdraw your remaining deposit balance and close the matter. Based on standard industry practice, it is highly unlikely that a casino would reverse this decision under these circumstances.
Please treat this as important advice for the future: never share devices and never log in from another player’s device — especially when using bonuses. This is strictly enforced across the entire industry.
Let me know how you would like to proceed.
TranslationHello Petronela,
Thank you for your honest assessment. However, I would like to clarify once again that the account was used exclusively by me. I made the deposit myself, played alone, and fully verified my identity with my own documents. My friend was never involved in my account and had no access to it.
The fact that I spent time with him or perhaps briefly used his device does not mean that it is a shared account or multiple registrations. These are two completely independent individuals with their own identities, wallets, and accounts.
My friend can also verify his identity if needed, so the casino can clearly see that these are two separate players who have nothing to do with each other. There was no agreement, no playing together, and no sharing of an account or funds. My friend also never played with a bonus.
In my view, the account was created correctly, the verification was successfully completed, and the bonus conditions were met. Therefore, I consider the complete confiscation of the winnings disproportionate and request a review of the case.
Thank you very much for your continued support.
Hi gandhi1988,
Thank you for clarifying again.
I need to explain very clearly why this situation is so difficult to defend from a compliance perspective.
When your account was accessed from your friend’s device, a permanent technical link was created between the two accounts. Casinos do not assess these cases based on personal statements — they assess them based on digital footprints such as:
- Device ID and browser fingerprint
Once two accounts share the same device, the casino’s system registers them as technically connected. From that moment, it becomes extremely difficult to prove that the accounts are fully independent in practice — even if they belong to two different real people.
This is why the statement:
"My friend was never involved in my account and had no access to it."
is problematic from the casino’s point of view. If the account was accessed from your friend’s device, then technically speaking, that device — and therefore your friend’s environment — was involved. Even if he did not physically sit next to you or log in himself, the shared device creates that association.
Similarly, saying:
"Two separate players who have nothing to do with each other."
is difficult to uphold once a shared device connection exists. In compliance terms, players who use the same device are no longer considered completely unrelated accounts, because that shared technical environment establishes a direct link between them.
This is exactly why casinos strictly prohibit shared devices in their Terms. It is not about accusing you of fraud — it is about risk management and bonus abuse prevention. Unfortunately, once that link exists, reversing a confiscation decision becomes extremely unlikely.
I understand this feels unfair from your personal perspective, but from a regulatory and fraud-detection standpoint, the casino’s suspicion is considered justified.
Given everything explained above, I would strongly recommend that you now proceed with withdrawing the refunded deposit balance (if it is currently available in your account).
At this stage, focusing on securing your original funds is the most realistic and safest course of action.
TranslationHello Petronela,
Thank you very much for your detailed and transparent explanation.
I understand the technical connection you described regarding device ID and browser fingerprinting. However, I would like to focus on the actual basis of the decision, namely the casino's terms and conditions.
As I understand it, the terms and conditions specifically prohibit the following:
- the creation and use of multiple accounts by the same person (duplicate accounts),
- sharing an account or granting access to third parties,
- as well as any form of collaboration or abuse, especially in connection with bonuses.
None of these points apply in my case.
I created and used my account exclusively myself, made my own deposits, played independently, and fully verified my identity with my personal documents. At no time was there any third-party access to or sharing of the account.
The crucial point for me is this:
I am not aware of any specific clause that explicitly defines the use of the same device or internet connection by two different people as a violation – especially when there is no shared use of an account, no shared funds, and no coordinated activity.
In my view, a technical connection can be a warning of risk, but it does not replace concrete proof of a violation of the terms and conditions.
Furthermore, I would like to emphasize that this is not a small amount. My deposit was €300, while my account balance was approximately €3,000. Precisely because of this substantial sum, it is particularly important to me that the decision is based on a clear and verifiable foundation.
Therefore, the question for me is which specific clause the complete confiscation of profits is based on in this case.
If doubts persist, the other account can of course be checked and verified separately to clearly confirm that they belong to two different people.
Against this background, I believe the decision is not sufficiently justified by a clear violation of the terms and conditions and request a reassessment of the case taking into account the actual rule basis.
Thank you for your support.
Hi gandhi1988,
Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
At this stage, I need to clarify one important point and conclude the case accordingly.
Please forget the argument about the same internet connection — that is not the decisive factor here.
What is relevant is that both accounts were accessed from the same device. From a compliance perspective, this directly falls under the rule prohibiting sharing an account or granting access to third parties.
In practice, one device should mean one user. Logins are remembered, sessions are stored, and devices create persistent digital identifiers. Once two accounts are accessed from the same device, the casino cannot distinguish whether the second person simply logged in independently or was granted access by the original account holder.
And this is exactly the issue: it becomes technically impossible for a player to prove that access was not granted to a third party once the same device is used.
Casinos do not need to prove collaboration beyond that technical link. The shared device itself creates a justified compliance concern under their anti-abuse and risk management rules.
I fully understand that from your personal perspective you see two separate individuals. However, from a regulatory and fraud-prevention standpoint, the casino’s position is considered justified once that device link exists.
For this reason, and after reviewing everything carefully, we are not in a position to challenge the casino’s decision further.
I am truly sorry that this is not the outcome you were hoping for.
Kind regards,
Petronela
Casino.Guru
