Dear NOROELLE,
I have now completed a detailed review of the additional account, balance, and gameplay records provided by Godz Casino. Unfortunately, based on the evidence available, I cannot conclude that the disputed €440 was legitimately withdrawable at the time the withdrawal was requested.
The casino's records show that the promotional Free Spins were used and that winnings from those Free Spins were credited to your bonus balance. The records also show that the wagering requirement connected to the active promotions had not been completed. At the time the promotional components were cancelled, a substantial amount of wagering was still outstanding.
More specifically, the account history shows that the Free Spins generated €7.31, which was released into the bonus balance. The account then continued to be played while the wagering requirement remained active. According to the casino's balance-flow records, approximately €4,574.76 of the wagering requirement was still outstanding shortly before the promotional components were cancelled.
The records then show that the active bonus components were cancelled first. Only after the cancellation was the €440 withdrawal requested. This sequence is important because cancelling an active bonus before completing its wagering requirement also cancels the bonus balance and the winnings generated while the bonus conditions are still active.
I have also considered your screenshot showing the withdrawal as "completed." I understand why this caused confusion and why you believed the withdrawal had already been successfully processed. However, the casino's subsequent account records show that the withdrawal was later cancelled and that the funds were not actually paid out to you. Therefore, the "completed" status shown in the account interface does not establish that the wagering requirement had been completed or that the €440 had become an unrestricted withdrawable balance.
The casino's records further show that €390 in bonus-related winnings was removed following the cancellation, while the original €50 deposit remained available on the account. This is consistent with the casino's explanation that the promotional winnings were voided because the bonus was cancelled before the wagering requirement was completed.
I also reviewed your statement that the Free Spins were not used and that the wagering requirement had already been completed. Unfortunately, the detailed account history provided by the casino directly contradicts both points. The Free Spins activity is recorded in the balance history, and the remaining wagering requirement is also shown before the bonus cancellation.
For these reasons, I consider the casino's application of the bonus-cancellation rule to be sufficiently supported by the available evidence. I therefore cannot ask Godz Casino to pay the disputed €440, and I will have to reject this complaint.
I understand that the way the withdrawal status was displayed may have been misleading and frustrating, but this does not change the underlying bonus status shown in the account records.
Thank you for your cooperation and patience while I investigated the case.
Best regards,
Samuel
Dear NOROELLE,
I have now completed a detailed review of the additional account, balance, and gameplay records provided by Godz Casino. Unfortunately, based on the evidence available, I cannot conclude that the disputed €440 was legitimately withdrawable at the time the withdrawal was requested.
The casino's records show that the promotional Free Spins were used and that winnings from those Free Spins were credited to your bonus balance. The records also show that the wagering requirement connected to the active promotions had not been completed. At the time the promotional components were cancelled, a substantial amount of wagering was still outstanding.
More specifically, the account history shows that the Free Spins generated €7.31, which was released into the bonus balance. The account then continued to be played while the wagering requirement remained active. According to the casino's balance-flow records, approximately €4,574.76 of the wagering requirement was still outstanding shortly before the promotional components were cancelled.
The records then show that the active bonus components were cancelled first. Only after the cancellation was the €440 withdrawal requested. This sequence is important because cancelling an active bonus before completing its wagering requirement also cancels the bonus balance and the winnings generated while the bonus conditions are still active.
I have also considered your screenshot showing the withdrawal as "completed." I understand why this caused confusion and why you believed the withdrawal had already been successfully processed. However, the casino's subsequent account records show that the withdrawal was later cancelled and that the funds were not actually paid out to you. Therefore, the "completed" status shown in the account interface does not establish that the wagering requirement had been completed or that the €440 had become an unrestricted withdrawable balance.
The casino's records further show that €390 in bonus-related winnings was removed following the cancellation, while the original €50 deposit remained available on the account. This is consistent with the casino's explanation that the promotional winnings were voided because the bonus was cancelled before the wagering requirement was completed.
I also reviewed your statement that the Free Spins were not used and that the wagering requirement had already been completed. Unfortunately, the detailed account history provided by the casino directly contradicts both points. The Free Spins activity is recorded in the balance history, and the remaining wagering requirement is also shown before the bonus cancellation.
For these reasons, I consider the casino's application of the bonus-cancellation rule to be sufficiently supported by the available evidence. I therefore cannot ask Godz Casino to pay the disputed €440, and I will have to reject this complaint.
I understand that the way the withdrawal status was displayed may have been misleading and frustrating, but this does not change the underlying bonus status shown in the account records.
Thank you for your cooperation and patience while I investigated the case.
Best regards,
Samuel