I am submitting a complaint against RoySpins regarding the confiscation of approximately €3,750 from my account.
I received a €175 cashback bonus. RoySpins relies on Clauses 6.6 and 6.7 of its Terms and Conditions and claims that cashback is treated as a no-deposit bonus with a maximum win/withdrawal of 10x the bonus amount, i.e. €1,750.
I do not dispute that this rule exists. My dispute concerns how RoySpins applied it to subsequent winnings after the €1,750 limit had already been reached.
On 25 September 2026, my RoySpins cashier displayed a balance of €4,500.83 explicitly as "Money you can withdraw", while the bonus balance showed €0.00.
My account was successfully verified and RoySpins continued verifying my payment methods for withdrawal. I had also made €1,700 in personal deposits.
After the alleged €1,750 cashback maximum had already been reached, I continued playing with funds that RoySpins itself displayed as unlocked and withdrawable. I then generated further winnings, including approximately €1,000 on the following day and other subsequent winnings.
My total winnings reached approximately €5,500. RoySpins ultimately paid only €1,750 and voided the remaining balance.
My main dispute is whether RoySpins is entitled to apply the original cashback cap indefinitely to all new winnings generated after:
the €1,750 maximum had already been reached;
the bonus balance had become €0.00;
the funds were displayed as withdrawable;
further gameplay and new winnings had occurred.
RoySpins has not identified any wording in Clauses 6.6 or 6.7 expressly stating that every subsequent win remains permanently subject to the original cashback cap after the maximum has already been reached.
RoySpins also stated in writing that "Money you can withdraw" and the €0.00 bonus balance were only interface indicators. I consider this highly misleading, because I was allowed to risk funds presented as fully withdrawable while the casino later claimed that amounts above €1,750 could never be withdrawn.
I exhausted the internal complaint process in good faith.
My original formal complaint was sent to both complaints@royspins.com and security@royspins.com. Only the Security Department responded.
Security rejected my complaint and later expressly confirmed that my next submission constituted a formal appeal and instructed me to direct further correspondence to the Complaints Service.
I forwarded my formal appeal to complaints@royspins.com. The Complaints Service did not provide any acknowledgement, reference number or substantive response during the following seven-day period.
When I subsequently sent follow-up messages, both complaints@royspins.com and security@royspins.com returned delivery failures stating "Host or domain name not found / Host not found".
I therefore attempted to exhaust RoySpins’ internal complaint process, but the designated Complaints Service did not respond and the official email channels subsequently became technically unavailable.
I request restoration and payment of all funds which RoySpins cannot specifically demonstrate, under the applicable contractual terms, remained subject to the original €175 cashback restriction after the €1,750 maximum had already been reached.
I can provide screenshots of the withdrawable balance, bonus balance, withdrawals, KYC verification, RoySpins’ written decision, formal appeal correspondence and the subsequent email delivery failures.
RoySpins later rejected my complaint in writing and relied specifically on Terms & Conditions Clauses 6.6 and 6.7, stating that cashback is treated as a no-deposit bonus and that the maximum amount that can be won and/or withdrawn is 10 times the cashback amount. I have the full written response containing these clauses and can provide it upon request.
I also have written confirmation from the RoySpins Security Department that my case constitutes a formal appeal and that further correspondence should be directed to the Complaints Service. Despite this, the Complaints Service did not acknowledge or respond to my appeal within seven days.
In addition, when I later attempted to follow up, both complaints@royspins.com and security@royspins.com returned delivery failures stating "Host or domain name not found / Host not found". I have preserved these delivery-failure messages and can provide them upon request.
I am submitting a complaint against RoySpins regarding the confiscation of approximately €3,750 from my account.
I received a €175 cashback bonus. RoySpins relies on Clauses 6.6 and 6.7 of its Terms and Conditions and claims that cashback is treated as a no-deposit bonus with a maximum win/withdrawal of 10x the bonus amount, i.e. €1,750.
I do not dispute that this rule exists. My dispute concerns how RoySpins applied it to subsequent winnings after the €1,750 limit had already been reached.
On 25 September 2026, my RoySpins cashier displayed a balance of €4,500.83 explicitly as "Money you can withdraw", while the bonus balance showed €0.00.
My account was successfully verified and RoySpins continued verifying my payment methods for withdrawal. I had also made €1,700 in personal deposits.
After the alleged €1,750 cashback maximum had already been reached, I continued playing with funds that RoySpins itself displayed as unlocked and withdrawable. I then generated further winnings, including approximately €1,000 on the following day and other subsequent winnings.
My total winnings reached approximately €5,500. RoySpins ultimately paid only €1,750 and voided the remaining balance.
My main dispute is whether RoySpins is entitled to apply the original cashback cap indefinitely to all new winnings generated after:
the €1,750 maximum had already been reached;
the bonus balance had become €0.00;
the funds were displayed as withdrawable;
further gameplay and new winnings had occurred.
RoySpins has not identified any wording in Clauses 6.6 or 6.7 expressly stating that every subsequent win remains permanently subject to the original cashback cap after the maximum has already been reached.
RoySpins also stated in writing that "Money you can withdraw" and the €0.00 bonus balance were only interface indicators. I consider this highly misleading, because I was allowed to risk funds presented as fully withdrawable while the casino later claimed that amounts above €1,750 could never be withdrawn.
I exhausted the internal complaint process in good faith.
My original formal complaint was sent to both complaints@royspins.com and security@royspins.com. Only the Security Department responded.
Security rejected my complaint and later expressly confirmed that my next submission constituted a formal appeal and instructed me to direct further correspondence to the Complaints Service.
I forwarded my formal appeal to complaints@royspins.com. The Complaints Service did not provide any acknowledgement, reference number or substantive response during the following seven-day period.
When I subsequently sent follow-up messages, both complaints@royspins.com and security@royspins.com returned delivery failures stating "Host or domain name not found / Host not found".
I therefore attempted to exhaust RoySpins’ internal complaint process, but the designated Complaints Service did not respond and the official email channels subsequently became technically unavailable.
I request restoration and payment of all funds which RoySpins cannot specifically demonstrate, under the applicable contractual terms, remained subject to the original €175 cashback restriction after the €1,750 maximum had already been reached.
I can provide screenshots of the withdrawable balance, bonus balance, withdrawals, KYC verification, RoySpins’ written decision, formal appeal correspondence and the subsequent email delivery failures.
RoySpins later rejected my complaint in writing and relied specifically on Terms & Conditions Clauses 6.6 and 6.7, stating that cashback is treated as a no-deposit bonus and that the maximum amount that can be won and/or withdrawn is 10 times the cashback amount. I have the full written response containing these clauses and can provide it upon request.
I also have written confirmation from the RoySpins Security Department that my case constitutes a formal appeal and that further correspondence should be directed to the Complaints Service. Despite this, the Complaints Service did not acknowledge or respond to my appeal within seven days.
In addition, when I later attempted to follow up, both complaints@royspins.com and security@royspins.com returned delivery failures stating "Host or domain name not found / Host not found". I have preserved these delivery-failure messages and can provide them upon request.