Hello Angelo,
After carefully reviewing your case, I have noticed that an issue with this casino was already thoroughly investigated and concluded in a previous complaint, which was closed as unjustified.
During the earlier case, we reviewed extensive communication between all parties and examined the verification process in detail. It was established that:
- The casino repeatedly requested specific KYC documents that did not meet the required quality or format.
- Several submitted documents showed clear signs of editing or manipulation, which prevented successful verification.
Under these circumstances, the casino acted in line with its Terms and Conditions, which you accepted upon registration.
Regarding your current claim that the casino is requesting documents already provided in the past, please note that previously rejected or non‑compliant documents cannot be reused. When documents are not accepted, the casino is entitled to request new, compliant versions, and this does not constitute an unreasonable delay.
As this matter has already been reviewed in full and no new evidence or circumstances have been presented, we are unable to pursue this complaint again.
If you disagree with the outcome, the appropriate next step would be to contact the casino’s regulator or an independent ADR entity listed on the casino’s website.
This complaint will therefore be rejected as unjustified.
In addition, we would like to point out that since the time your original complaint was submitted, our internal policy has changed.
Providing fake, forged, edited, or otherwise manipulated documents to a casino is now considered a serious violation of Casino Guru’s rules and results in a permanent ban from using our complaint services.
Best regards,
Veronika Fritz
Casino.Guru Complaints Team
Hello Angelo,
After carefully reviewing your case, I have noticed that an issue with this casino was already thoroughly investigated and concluded in a previous complaint, which was closed as unjustified.
During the earlier case, we reviewed extensive communication between all parties and examined the verification process in detail. It was established that:
- The casino repeatedly requested specific KYC documents that did not meet the required quality or format.
- Several submitted documents showed clear signs of editing or manipulation, which prevented successful verification.
Under these circumstances, the casino acted in line with its Terms and Conditions, which you accepted upon registration.
Regarding your current claim that the casino is requesting documents already provided in the past, please note that previously rejected or non‑compliant documents cannot be reused. When documents are not accepted, the casino is entitled to request new, compliant versions, and this does not constitute an unreasonable delay.
As this matter has already been reviewed in full and no new evidence or circumstances have been presented, we are unable to pursue this complaint again.
If you disagree with the outcome, the appropriate next step would be to contact the casino’s regulator or an independent ADR entity listed on the casino’s website.
This complaint will therefore be rejected as unjustified.
In addition, we would like to point out that since the time your original complaint was submitted, our internal policy has changed.
Providing fake, forged, edited, or otherwise manipulated documents to a casino is now considered a serious violation of Casino Guru’s rules and results in a permanent ban from using our complaint services.
Best regards,
Veronika Fritz
Casino.Guru Complaints Team