Slotozen Casino - Player's withdrawals are delayed and funds have been confiscated.

Hello Casino Guru Team,

I am trying to submit a complaint through your website, but the form does not accept my text.

I would like to file a complaint against Slotozen Casino regarding delayed withdrawals, lack of transparency, and a disputed balance confiscation.

I currently have €140,000 in pending withdrawals. Despite multiple follow-ups, the casino has not provided any clear payment timeline. Only one payment of €4,000 has been processed.

Additionally, €100,000 was removed from my account under bonus terms, which I formally dispute.

The wagering requirement of €17,000 was fully completed through approximately 3400 spins at €5. After completion, the betting restriction was lifted, and I was allowed to continue playing without limitation.

This indicates that the bonus conditions were fulfilled and the balance became real funds. Applying a cashout limit afterward is retroactive and unfair.

I also requested a full account statement, but only received an unusable file. No clear or complete history has been provided.

I request:

Immediate payment of €140,000

Restitution of €100,000

A complete account statement

Please find attached all relevant evidence.

Thank you for your assistance.

Kind regards,

Jérôme M********

I would like to provide additional evidence and clarification regarding my complaint against Slotozen Casino.

1. Bonus and Wagering Completion

The disputed amount originates from a comp points exchange bonus:

– Bonus amount: €700

– Wagering requirement: x25

– Total required wagering: €17,500

– Wagering completed: €17,501.25

This confirms that the wagering requirement was fully completed in accordance with the bonus terms.

2. Specific Terms vs General Terms

According to the comp points exchange rules, the only condition explicitly stated is the wagering requirement (x25).

There is no clear mention within these specific terms of any maximum withdrawal limit (such as x10) being applied after the wagering is completed.

However, the casino is now applying a general bonus rule limiting withdrawals to x10 of the bonus amount.

3. Core Issue

This creates a contradiction:

– The specific bonus terms (comp points) only require wagering

– The general bonus terms introduce an additional withdrawal restriction not clearly stated in the specific offer

From my perspective, once the wagering requirement was completed, the funds should have been considered fully withdrawable.

4. Current Situation

– €136,000 in withdrawals remain pending, with no clear payment schedule

– Only €4,000 has been paid so far

– €100,000 has been removed based on the disputed rule

Additionally, I have now stopped all gameplay to avoid further complications and to keep the situation clear.

5. Request

I kindly ask for your assistance in:

– Ensuring the withdrawal process is completed without further delay

– Reviewing the fairness of applying a maximum cashout limit after full wagering completion

– Supporting a fair resolution of the disputed €100,000

I am ready to provide any additional evidence required.

Thank you for your assistance.

Kind regards,

Jérôme M********

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 Jérôme,

Thank you very much for submitting your complaint. I’m sorry to hear about the problem you’ve encountered.

Thank you also for providing extensive documentation and communication with the casino — this is very helpful for understanding the full scope of the issue. From the materials provided, I can see that a significant amount of €140,000 remains pending without a clear payment schedule, and that €100,000 was removed based on bonus terms, which you are disputing. I also note that the casino is referring to a maximum withdrawal limit of x10 the bonus amount, even after wagering was completed , while your evidence shows the wagering requirement was indeed fully met .

To proceed effectively and assess whether the casino acted in line with fair practices, I would like to kindly ask you to clarify a few additional points:

• Can you confirm whether the €100,000 balance was adjusted immediately after completing the wagering requirement, or only later (for example, at the moment of withdrawal)?
• After completing the wagering, did your balance appear as fully real/withdrawable funds without any restrictions?
• Was there any pop-up, notification, or warning informing you that bonus rules (such as a max cashout limit) would still apply even after wagering was completed?
• Are all your verification (KYC) requirements fully completed and approved, or is anything still pending?

If you have any additional documentation (especially a full transaction history or clearer account statement), please upload it here or forward it to petronela.k@casino.guru.

Your cooperation in providing these details will help us investigate and work towards a resolution.

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

Dear Petronela,

Thank you for your message and for handling my case.

Please find below my clarifications:

Timing of the €100,000 adjustment

The €100,000 was not removed immediately after completing the wagering requirement.

After completing the wagering, my balance was approximately €107,000.

I successfully requested and received a withdrawal of €4,000.

The following day, after this withdrawal, €100,000 was removed from my balance.

This clearly shows that the adjustment was made after the funds had already been treated as real and withdrawable.

Status of the balance after wagering

Yes, after completing the wagering requirement (€700 x25), my balance appeared as fully real and withdrawable funds, without any restriction.

I was able to continue playing normally and even proceed with a withdrawal, which confirms that the bonus conditions had been fulfilled.

Notification of any remaining bonus restrictions

No, I did not receive any notification, warning, or message indicating that a maximum cashout limit (such as x10) would still apply after completing the wagering requirement.

At no point was I informed that such a restriction would remain in place.

KYC verification

Yes, all KYC requirements have been fully completed and approved.

There are no pending verification issues on my account.

Nature of the bonus (important clarification)

The €700 bonus originated from comp points earned through real money gameplay and deposits.

I have consistently deposited and played with real money, often without bonuses. These points are therefore directly linked to my real-money activity, not a standard promotional bonus.

Payment terms not respected

According to the information provided directly by my VIP manager, the withdrawal limits are:

– €20,000 per week

– €60,000 per month

However, since the beginning of April, I have received no payments at all, despite having €136,000 in pending withdrawals.

This clearly shows that the casino is not respecting its own stated payment terms.

Request

Given all of the above, I kindly request:

– Immediate processing of my pending withdrawals (€136,000), preferably in full

– Respect of the stated weekly and monthly payment limits if full payment is not possible

– Restitution of the disputed €100,000, as the funds had already become real and withdrawable after wagering completion

I remain available to provide any additional documents if needed.

Thank you very much for your assistance.

Kind regards,

Jérôme M********

Additional Observations – Account Statement Issues

Dear Petronela,

Following my previous messages, I would like to provide additional observations regarding the account statement provided by the casino.

Please find attached the files received from Slotozen Casino.

After reviewing these documents, I can confirm that they do not accurately reflect my actual activity.

The data provided is inconsistent and does not correspond to my understanding of my deposits, withdrawals, and gameplay. It is therefore not possible for me to verify the transactions or reconcile the figures.

Additionally, the files are not presented in a clear or structured way, making it extremely difficult to follow the sequence of events (deposits, bets, wins, withdrawals, and adjustments).

Because of this, I am unable to validate the accuracy of the information or understand how the disputed amounts have been calculated.

Thank you for your assistance.

Kind regards,

Jérôme M********

Additional Information – Withdrawal Delays

Dear Petronela,

I would like to provide additional information regarding the withdrawal situation.

Please find attached a screenshot showing the latest withdrawals marked as "accepted" by the casino.

Several withdrawals of €4,000 have been approved. Based on my previous experience, once a withdrawal is marked as accepted, the payment is usually received within a few days. However, this is currently not the case.

Furthermore, the amounts processed remain significantly below the stated limits of €20,000 per week and €60,000 per month. Additionally, no payments were received during the first week of April.

This indicates that the casino is not adhering to its stated payment conditions.

Given the total outstanding balance, processing withdrawals in this manner could result in a very prolonged payout period.

Therefore, I kindly request that the casino proceed with a full settlement of the outstanding balance in a single payment, or at least respect its published withdrawal limits.

Thank you for your assistance.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Jérôme M********

Follow-up on Slotozen Complaint – Payment Status

Dear Petronela,

I hope you are doing well.

I am writing to follow up regarding my ongoing complaint about Slotozen Casino (Complaint ID: 204457), as I would like to get an update on the current status of the case.

This week, I have received a payment of €20,000. However, this amount remains below what should normally be processed, especially considering that no payment at all was made during the first week of April. This suggests that the casino is not respecting the stated payment schedule or the agreed limits.

Additionally, I would like to reiterate a key issue regarding the €100,000 that was removed from my balance. This amount was incorrectly treated as linked to a bonus, even though I had already fully completed the wagering requirements and the funds had been converted into real, withdrawable funds. I therefore request that Slotozen restores this €100,000 to my account, as it was legitimately won and should not be subject to any bonus-related restriction.

Furthermore, despite the recent €20,000 payment, there is still approximately €120,000 in outstanding winnings that remain unpaid. I would like to understand when and how this remaining balance will be settled.

Given this situation, I would appreciate your guidance on the following points:

Do you have any updates or feedback from the casino regarding my case?

Is there any progress toward resolving the outstanding balance?

Should I take any additional steps on my side to help move the process forward?

As previously mentioned in my messages, the current payment pattern and the misclassification of funds suggest that the casino is not adhering to its own terms, both in terms of amounts and timing.

Thank you again for your support and assistance in this matter. I look forward to your reply.

Kind regards,

Jérôme M********

Dear Jérôme,

Thank you for your message, and I’m sorry for my delayed reply.

I also appreciate the detailed information and additional documents you have provided — they are very helpful for our assessment.

I have carefully reviewed the bonus terms and conditions related to comp points on the casino’s website, and I must say that I was not able to find any clearly stated maximum cashout limit applicable specifically to this type of bonus.

With that in mind, I would like to kindly ask you to clarify one important point — did you receive any specific bonus terms and conditions for the comp points exchange directly from your VIP manager (for example via email or chat)? If so, could you please forward this communication to us, ideally in its original form?

This will help us determine whether any additional conditions were applied to your bonus that may not be publicly visible.

Once we have this information, we will be in a better position to assess the fairness of the €100,000 adjustment and proceed accordingly.

Thank you.

Chère Petronela,

Suite à mon précédent message, je vous informe que je viens de vous envoyer par courriel des informations complémentaires, notamment l'intégralité de mes échanges avec mon gestionnaire VIP, Eugène.

Ces documents confirment clairement ma position, en particulier l'absence de limite de retrait et la levée de toutes les restrictions après le respect des conditions de mise.

Merci de bien vouloir confirmer la réception de ces documents après les avoir consultés.

Je vous remercie encore pour votre aide.

Cordialement,

Jérôme M********

Dear Petronela,

I am following up regarding my complaint (ID: 204457), as I have not yet received any response to my last message, despite the standard response timeframe now being exceeded.

In my previous communication, I provided detailed evidence, including full exchanges with my VIP manager, clearly demonstrating that:

No maximum cashout limitation was ever communicated

All wagering requirements were fully completed

The €100,000 removed from my balance is unjustified and should be restored

Given the completeness of the information already submitted, I would greatly appreciate your feedback on these key points.

Additionally, I would like to highlight that the casino’s payment behavior remains inconsistent and does not respect their stated limits:

First week of April: €0

Second week: €20,000

Third week: €12,000

Current week: €4,000

This decreasing trend does not align with the advertised €20,000 weekly limit.

At this stage:

€100,000 remains unjustifiably removed

€104,000 in confirmed withdrawals are still outstanding and have not been paid in accordance with the stated terms

While I acknowledge the partial payments made, the overall situation remains unresolved, both regarding the disputed amount and the lack of a consistent and reliable payment schedule.

I would therefore kindly ask for an update on:

The casino’s position regarding the €100,000

The expected timeline for the remaining €104,000

The next steps in resolving this case

If no meaningful progress is made, I will have to consider further steps to protect my rights.

Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your reply.

Kind regards,

Jérôme M********

Dear Petronela,

I hope you are well.

I am following up again as the six-day response timeframe has now passed, and I have not received any feedback regarding the substantial evidence I provided, including the exchanges with Eugene supporting that the €100,000 removed from my balance is unjustified and rightfully due to me.

I am increasingly concerned because, beyond the unresolved €100,000, the casino also continues not to respect its stated payment conditions. Payments have decreased significantly (from €20,000, then €12,000, and only €4,000 this past week), while €104,000 in approved withdrawals remain outstanding.

Given the importance of the sums involved and the absence of meaningful progress, I kindly ask for an update on the status of my complaint and the next steps.

As there is already a complaint pending through Casino Guru but the matter remains unresolved, I may unfortunately be obliged to consider further legal action to protect my rights if no progress is made. Given the significance of the amounts involved, I cannot allow this matter to remain indefinitely unresolved.

Thank you in advance for your attention, and I look forward to your response.

Kind regards,

Jérôme M********

Dear METZINGER,

Thank you for your cooperation and for providing all the necessary information. I truly appreciate the time and effort you’ve taken to share everything with us so far.

Your complaint will now move to the next stage of our process and be handled by your dedicated Resolver, Matej (matej@casino.guru). This is a standard step in our procedure, as the Resolver will take over communication with the casino directly and manage your case from this point onward.

No action is required from you right now. Your Resolver will reach out through this thread if any additional details are needed. You can rest assured that your case is in very capable hands.

I wish you the best of luck and hope your case will be resolved to your satisfaction soon.

Dear Matej,

Thank you for taking over my case.

I understand the complaint has moved to the next stage, and I will await your update regarding the status of the matter with Slotozen and any actions being taken with the casino.

Please let me know if you need any additional information or documents from my side — I remain fully available to assist.

Kind regards,

Jérôme Metzinger

Hello METZINGER,

I am sorry to hear about your troubles.

I would like to invite the casino representative into the case:

Dear casino representative, could you please check the case and explain to us what happened?

Hello Matej,

We have carefully reviewed the player’s account and would like to provide clarification on the key points raised.

1. Bonus Type and Applied Rules

The player used a bonus identified as "comp_points_exchange_n9" in the amount of €700.

 This bonus is categorized as a bonus conversion from comp points, which falls under the general bonus framework.

According to our Terms & Conditions, the following rule applies to all such bonuses (including comp points conversions):

"The maximum winnings that will be paid out resulting from any cash bonus, cashback, personal bonus, free chip bonus (including, but not limited to Welcome Package, Weekend Reload, Special Bonuses for VIP Levels, Comppoints, Tournament wins, Lottery wins, etc.) will equal the bonus amount multiplied by 10 unless otherwise stated."

In this case:

Bonus amount: €700

Maximum cashout: €7,000

The player’s balance exceeded this limit, and therefore was adjusted in accordance with the above rule.

Additionally, the Terms clearly state:

"Any winnings exceeding this amount will be forfeited upon withdrawal or after 24h after bonus wagering. Please note that until withdrawal of relevant balance is processed, funds on the balance will be considered subject to maximum winnings rule."

This means that even after wagering is completed, the maximum cashout rule remains applicable until the withdrawal is fully processed.

2. Player’s Claim Regarding "Real Balance"

The player states that the balance became "real" after wagering.

However, as outlined above, completion of wagering does not remove the maximum winnings limitation. The balance remains subject to bonus conditions until withdrawal is finalized. This is standard practice and clearly defined in the Terms.

3. VIP Manager Communication

We would like to clarify that the message shared by the player relates to a different bonus type (cashback bonus). It does not apply to the comp points exchange bonus in question. Additionally, VIP communication is informational in nature and does not override or replace the official Terms & Conditions.

4. Withdrawal Processing

The player’s withdrawals are being actively processed. Payments are carried out strictly in line with the withdrawal limits and procedures defined in the Terms & Conditions.

We would also like to emphasize that a substantial portion of the balance has already been successfully paid out. All processed transactions are reflected in the player’s account, and we encourage reviewing the transaction history for full transparency.

Withdrawals continue to be handled in accordance with the applicable limits, which the player can also verify directly in the Terms. Processing times may vary depending on standard operational and verification procedures, which is a normal part of the payout process.

5. Conclusion

• The bonus used by the player is clearly covered by the general bonus rules.
• The maximum cashout limit of x10 was correctly applied
• The balance adjustment was performed in full compliance with the Terms & Conditions
• Withdrawals are ongoing and handled within standard procedures

We therefore consider that the actions taken on this account are justified and in line with the applicable rules.

Kind regards,

Slotozen Casino

Dear Slotozen Casino,

The information you provided is crystal clear, and in this case everything makes sense.

However, when I reviewed the bonus details on your website, I was unable to find the following information in the bonus description:

"The maximum winnings that will be paid out resulting from any cash bonus, cashback, personal bonus, free chip bonus (including, but not limited to Welcome Package, Weekend Reload, Special Bonuses for VIP Levels, Comppoints, Tournament wins, Lottery wins, etc.) will equal the bonus amount multiplied by 10 unless otherwise stated."

I understand that this rule is mentioned in the bonus terms and conditions; however, it is not visible in the bonus detail itself.

For players, this is one of the most important pieces of information, and it is completely missing from the bonus overview. I would strongly recommend including this in each bonus description, along with clear information about the maximum bet allowed during wagering.

Dear METZINGER,

I have reviewed the rules, and everything the casino stated appears to be correct. Could you please confirm whether the bonus you used was indeed comp_points_exchange_n9? Would you like to add anything to the casino’s clarification?

Reply from METZINGER received via email:

First, regarding withdrawals, the casino states payments are being processed according to its limits and procedures, but the facts show otherwise.

The Slotozen Casino explicitly communicated withdrawal limits of €20,000 per week and €60,000 per month. However, in April only €36,000 was paid in total:

• First week of April: €0
• 8–10 April: €20,000
• 16 April: €12,000
• 20 April: €4,000
• Last week of April: €0

This is clearly below the stated €60,000 monthly limit and demonstrates that the casino is not respecting its own payment conditions.

Meanwhile, €104,000 in approved withdrawals remains outstanding. At the current pace, repayment could be stretched over many months, which is unreasonable. I therefore request immediate payment of the full outstanding €104,000.

Regarding the disputed €100,000, I strongly contest the casino’s justification.

The x25 wagering requirement attached to the €700 comp points exchange bonus was fully completed (€17,501.25 wagered). This is not disputed.

The casino now relies on a general x10 maximum cashout clause, but I dispute both its applicability and the way it has been applied in this case.

First, this interpretation contradicts the casino’s own established practice with me.

Over many months, VIP manager Eugene granted me multiple cashbacks, personal bonuses and loyalty-related bonuses. Many were expressly without restrictions, and where temporary limitations existed, those restrictions ended once conditions were fulfilled. Winnings from those bonuses were withdrawable and no x10 cap was applied.

This directly contradicts the casino’s current assertion that such bonuses were always subject to the limitation they now invoke.

Second, Eugene explicitly confirmed in writing on 27 March 2026 that once wagering was completed, restrictions were removed. Two days later, €100,000 was removed from my balance.

Those two positions are incompatible.

Third, once wagering was completed, I was able to continue playing with my normal stake sizes and without betting restrictions.

This point is crucial:

once there are no longer wagering limits or gameplay restrictions, the bonus is effectively completed and the subsequent winnings generated during unrestricted play should be treated as real and withdrawable funds.

That is how these bonuses had functioned in practice, and it is also consistent with the VIP communications I received.

Additionally, I had already successfully received a €4,000 withdrawal before the balance adjustment, further confirming the funds had been treated as real and withdrawable.

For all of these reasons, I do not accept that the x10 limitation was validly applicable in this case, and I maintain that the €100,000 adjustment was unjustified and these funds should be fully restored.

Summary of amounts due:

• €104,000 in outstanding approved withdrawals to be paid immediately
• €100,000 unjustifiably removed from balance to be restored

Total amount due: €204,000.

I remain at your disposal for any further evidence or full VIP correspondence if useful, and I appreciate your assistance in pursuing resolution of both issues.

Reply from METZINGER received via email:

I am writing to address the ongoing issues regarding both outstanding withdrawals and the disputed €100,000.

First, regarding withdrawals, your stated limits are €20,000 per week and €60,000 per month. However, in April I received only €36,000 in total instead of €60,000.

This leaves a shortfall of €24,000, which should have been paid within April. I therefore request that this remaining €24,000 be paid immediately and in a single payment to bring April in line with your stated monthly limit.

As we are now in May, I note that two withdrawals of €4,000 have already been accepted (total €8,000). Payments must now continue in accordance with your stated limits of €20,000 per week and €60,000 per month.

At present, €104,000 in approved withdrawals remains outstanding, and I expect payments to proceed without further delay and in full compliance with your conditions.

Second, I remain fully in dispute regarding the €100,000 removed from my balance. This amount was unjustifiably deducted despite all wagering requirements having been fulfilled, and I am still awaiting its full restitution.

Given the importance of the amounts involved, I cannot accept further delays or inconsistencies.

If your payment conditions are not respected and the €100,000 is not restored promptly, I will be obliged to pursue further action, including engaging a specialized lawyer and continuing the complaint process with Casino Guru so that this matter remains publicly documented.

Dear METZINGER,

We are extending the timer by 7 days. Please, be aware that in case you fail to respond in the given time frame or don’t require any further assistance, we will reject the complaint.

Subject: Re: Complaint ID 204457 Dear Matej, Thank you for your reply and for the time spent reviewing my case internally. However,I must respectfully state that I do not agree with the conclusion regarding the €100,000 deduction. I fully completed the x25 wagering requirement, and based on my experience over nearly three years playing on Slotozen — as well as my experience on many other online casinos — once wagering requirements such as x30 or x40 are completed, players are normally free to continue playing and withdraw winnings without further restriction. In addition, during all my years playing on Slotozen, I have never once had a x10 maximum cashout limitation applied in this manner. This is also inconsistent with the VIP practices and bonuses I previously received. Given the amounts involved and the fact that I strongly believe the €100,000 was unjustifiably removed, I will now have to consider pursuing the matter through a specialized lawyer. I also believe this complaint process has taken an excessive amount of time considering the urgency and seriousness of the situation. Regarding withdrawals, the casino still does not respect its stated payment conditions: – During April, I received only €36,000 instead of the advertised €60,000 monthly limit – During the first week of May, I received €16,000 (€12,000 on May 5th and €4,000 on May 8th) – Yesterday, on May 11th, I received another €4,000 At present, €84,000 still remains unpaid. In addition, the €24,000 missing from April should be paid immediately in order to regularize the situation and bring payments in line with the casino’s stated limits. To conclude, I consider that this dispute remains unresolved, both regarding the €100,000 deducted and the ongoing withdrawal delays and inconsistencies. I will therefore now seek assistance from a specialized lawyer in order to protect and enforce my rights. Thank you for your assistance so far, and I remain available if needed. Kind regards, ********

Subject: Re: Complaint ID 204457

Dear Matej,

Thank you for your reply and for the time spent reviewing my case internally.

However,I must respectfully state that I do not agree with the conclusion regarding the €100,000 deduction.

I fully completed the x25 wagering requirement, and based on my experience over nearly three years playing on Slotozen — as well as my experience on many other online casinos — once wagering requirements such as x30 or x40 are completed, players are normally free to continue playing and withdraw winnings without further restriction.

In addition, during all my years playing on Slotozen, I have never once had a x10 maximum cashout limitation applied in this manner. This is also inconsistent with the VIP practices and bonuses I previously received.

Given the amounts involved and the fact that I strongly believe the €100,000 was unjustifiably removed, I will now have to consider pursuing the matter through a specialized lawyer.

I also believe this complaint process has taken an excessive amount of time considering the urgency and seriousness of the situation.

Regarding withdrawals, the casino still does not respect its stated payment conditions:

– During April, I received only €36,000 instead of the advertised €60,000 monthly limit

– During the first week of May, I received €16,000 (€12,000 on May 5th and €4,000 on May 8th)

– Yesterday, on May 11th, I received another €4,000

At present, €84,000 still remains unpaid.

In addition, the €24,000 missing from April should be paid immediately in order to regularize the situation and bring payments in line with the casino’s stated limits.

To conclude, I consider that this dispute remains unresolved, both regarding the €100,000 deducted and the ongoing withdrawal delays and inconsistencies. I will therefore now seek assistance from a specialized lawyer in order to protect and enforce my rights.

Thank you for your assistance so far, and I remain available if needed.

Kind regards,

********

Dear METZINGER,

Could you please confirm whether the bonus you used was indeed the "comp_points_exchange_n9" bonus?

The VIP bonuses you receive through your VIP manager are specialized offers tailored specifically for you. However, the comp points exchange bonus operates differently. It is essentially a standard free bonus available through the loyalty system, and such bonuses typically include limits on winnings or withdrawals. In this particular case, the bonus terms appear to be clear regarding those restrictions.

I would also ask you to consider the matter from the casino’s perspective. If a casino provides a free bonus that is widely accessible, it must also implement rules that prevent disproportionate winnings from being generated through that bonus alone. This is precisely why free bonuses commonly include maximum withdrawal or winnings caps.

The most important question, which still remains unanswered, is whether the €100,000 in winnings originated from this specific bonus. If that is indeed the case, then I am afraid there may be very limited options available in terms of disputing the deduction.

Of course, you are fully entitled to seek independent legal advice or pursue the matter through the courts. However, based on the information currently available, I do not believe that such action would help.

Dear Matej,

First of all, I would like to point out that the withdrawal situation with Slotozen is becoming extremely difficult and exhausting.

The casino is still not respecting its own stated payment conditions, and the delays are becoming unbearable.

Only €36,000 were paid during April instead of the advertised €60,000 monthly limit, meaning that €24,000 from April still remain unpaid and have never been regularized.

Between May 5th and May 9th, Slotozen paid a total of €20,000, but since then the casino has completely stopped making payments for the past 6 days. No new payment has been processed or even scheduled, while €84,000 still remain unpaid.

There have also been cancelled withdrawals and inconsistent explanations regarding withdrawal limits, which only increases my concerns regarding the handling of my account.

Regarding the disputed €100,000, I still respectfully disagree with the conclusion that this situation is simply a standard free bonus case.

Yes, I confirm that the bonus used was "comp_points_exchange_n9".

However, throughout nearly three years playing on Slotozen, I have never once experienced this x10 maximum cashout limitation being applied after wagering requirements were completed.

I received many bonuses, comp_points_exchange, cashback offers and VIP compensations over time, and once wagering requirements or limits were completed, I was always able to continue playing freely and withdraw winnings normally without further restrictions.

This created a legitimate understanding and expectation regarding how bonuses functioned on my account and on this casino generally.

In addition, the communication with Eugene and the VIP team consistently reinforced the idea that these bonuses and cashback offers were usable without such restrictive consequences once conditions were fulfilled.

I have already provided emails showing bonuses without betting restrictions, cashback with x1 conditions, and situations where I could continue playing and withdraw normally after completion.

I would also like to clarify an important point: I was not playing using deposit bonuses. The overwhelming majority of my gameplay and deposits on Slotozen were made using real-money deposits without bonuses.

I also want to highlight that on my Slotozen loyalty page, the visible rules for my Level 14 account clearly state wagering conditions (x20 / x25 depending on levels), but there is absolutely no visible mention of a x10 maximum cashout limitation within the loyalty program description itself.

My account specifically showed:

– Bonus: comp_points_exchange_n9

– Bonus amount: €700

– Wagering requirement: x25

– Required wagering: €17,500

– Wagered amount completed: €17,501.25

– Status: "Pari effectué" (completed)

Dates shown on my account:

– 27 March 2026, 18:58

– 03 April 2026, 19:58

This clearly confirmed to me that the wagering requirement had been fully completed and validated by the casino system itself.

As a long-term VIP player on Slotozen for nearly three years, I had never experienced such a x10 limitation being enforced after wagering completion. On the contrary, once wagering conditions were completed, I was always able to continue playing normally and withdraw winnings freely.

This is why I genuinely believed the balance had become fully withdrawable after completion of the wagering requirement.

I understand your position regarding the general bonus terms, but I believe the lack of visibility of this x10 restriction inside the loyalty exchange system itself is a major issue, especially considering:

– the loyalty program only highlighted the x25 wagering requirement

– the system confirmed the wagering as completed

– my previous experience on the casino consistently differed from the application now being used against me

– I never once had this x10 rule applied in nearly three years of activity on Slotozen

I also believe it is important to distinguish between:

– a player attempting to abuse a free bonus

and

– a long-term VIP player with substantial real-money deposits and losses over several years.

I deposited and lost significant amounts of real money on Slotozen over time, with more than €................ in net losses over nearly three years of activity.

For all these reasons, I do not consider the dispute resolved and I will now consult a specialized lawyer regarding this matter.

Kind regards,

********* **********

Dear Metzinger,

The casino stated:

"At the same time, I would like to clarify that according to the currently applicable payment rules and withdrawal framework of the casino, the monthly withdrawal limit is €20,000, and payouts are being processed in accordance with the terms and conditions published on the website."

Dear casino representatives, could you please clarify when and how these limits were changed? Previously, the limit appeared to be €60,000, while now you are stating that the monthly withdrawal limit is €20,000.

Regarding your statement:

"However, throughout nearly three years playing on Slotozen, I have never once experienced this x10 maximum cashout limitation being applied after wagering requirements were completed. I received many bonuses, comp_points_exchange, cashback offers and VIP compensations over time, and once wagering requirements or limits were completed, I was always able to continue playing freely and withdraw winnings normally without further restrictions."

I assume you are mainly referring to VIP bonuses, which are governed by different rules than free bonuses. Bonuses connected to a deposit requirement are considered differently because they require the player to use their own funds in order to qualify for them.

In this particular case, the bonus was a loyalty/free bonus, where no deposit or own funds were required. Because of that, it falls under the category of free bonuses.

That being said, if you believe that the casino did not apply the 10x maximum cashout rule to free bonuses in the past and only changed or enforced the rule after your win, please provide us with an example of such a situation.

However, I must also point out that providing such an example alone would not automatically be sufficient. It would also be necessary to demonstrate that the 10x rule was not present in the terms and conditions at the time you received and played the bonus.

I understand your frustration and feelings regarding the situation. However, we must remain transparent and consistent, and we approach all similar cases in the same manner.

Hello Matej,

Thank you for your reply.

The main issue today is no longer only the x10 rule, but

above all the fact that Slotozen has practically stopped all payments and is no longer respecting the withdrawal conditions that were communicated to me and applied for years, as well as the obvious changes regarding both bonus and payment rules.

I also believe that Casino Guru never insisted strongly

enough that Slotozen should respect its payment obligations and the conditions that had been effectively applied for months.

For a long time, the limits applied and communicated were

clearly around €20,000 per week and €60,000 per month. Considering that I played and spent very significant amounts on the casino before this situation, the payments received on my bank account clearly demonstrate this:

– January: approximately €59,000 – February: approximately €62,800 – March: approximately €42,000 – April: only €36,000 instead of €60,000 – May: only €20,000 paid in total – since May 9th: no further payment at all despite more than €84,000 still unpaid

And now, suddenly, Slotozen claims that the monthly withdrawal limit would only be €20,000 per month.

It is therefore obvious that there has been a modification, reinterpretation or change of the payment rules after the fact, which is extremely problematic and serious.

At this stage, we are no longer talking about small amounts, but about €84,000 still unpaid, not including the additional €100,000 removed directly from my balance.

Regarding the bonus issue, I confirm that I am also referring to free bonuses.

In my case, the bonus in question originated from loyalty points earned through my real-money deposits made without bonuses. This bonus included a x25 wagering requirement and a €5 maximum bet limitation. Once the wagering requirements were completed, this restriction was lifted and I was then able to continue playing freely with any amounts and withdraw normally, exactly as had always happened previously on Slotozen.

I also confirm that during nearly three years on Slotozen, I was always able to continue playing and withdraw my winnings normally after completing wagering requirements, regardless of the type of bonus used, including free bonuses.

It is also interesting to note that today Slotozen now displays very visible limitations directly within its promotional offers.

For example, in a promotional VIP email I received on May 21st 2026, the following was clearly stated:

"50 Free Spins 🎰 Min deposit €35 · Wagering ×10 · Max cashout €500"

This demonstrates that Slotozen now considers it necessary to display these withdrawal limitations clearly and visibly in its promotions.

However, this level of visibility, clarity and transparency simply did not exist previously regarding the bonuses I used over the years.

This is precisely why the current situation appears inconsistent, deeply unfair and completely contrary to the way bonuses and withdrawals had always functioned on my account before.

It is also important to remember that players have absolutely no access to previous archived versions of the casino’s terms and conditions or to the internal changes made over time. Only Slotozen possesses this information.

Therefore, it should be the casino’s responsibility to transparently provide:

– the exact versions of the terms and conditions applicable at the time of the winnings; – the precise dates when these rules were modified; – proof that these limitations were clearly visible and effectively applied before this dispute; – and a clear explanation as to why both the payment rules and bonus interpretations suddenly changed after my large winnings.

At this point, several rules appear to have been modified, reinterpreted or reinforced after the winnings in order to reduce or delay payments owed.

Today, I sincerely feel that Slotozen is taking advantage of the current situation and of Casino Guru’s public position regarding this dispute in order to block or delay payments without any real consequence.

Kind regards,

****** *******

Hello Matej,

Thank you for your reply.

The main issue today is no longer only the x10 rule, but above all the fact that Slotozen has practically stopped all payments and is no longer respecting the withdrawal conditions that were communicated to me and applied for years, as well as the obvious changes regarding both bonus and payment rules.

I also believe that Casino Guru never insisted strongly enough that Slotozen should respect its payment obligations and the conditions that had been effectively applied for months.

For a long time, the limits applied and communicated were clearly around €20,000 per week and €60,000 per month. Considering that I played and spent very significant amounts on the casino before this situation, the payments received on my bank account clearly demonstrate this:

– January: approximately €59,000

– February: approximately €62,800

– March: approximately €42,000

– April: only €36,000 instead of €60,000

– May: only €20,000 paid in total

– since May 9th: no further payment at all despite more than €84,000 still unpaid

And now, suddenly, Slotozen claims that the monthly withdrawal limit would only be €20,000 per month.

It is therefore obvious that there has been a modification, reinterpretation or change of the payment rules after the fact, which is extremely problematic and serious.

At this stage, we are no longer talking about small amounts, but about €84,000 still unpaid, not including the additional €100,000 removed directly from my balance.

Regarding the bonus issue, I confirm that I am also referring to free bonuses.

In my case, the bonus in question originated from loyalty points earned through my real-money deposits made without bonuses. This bonus included a x25 wagering requirement and a €5 maximum bet limitation. Once the wagering requirements were completed, this restriction was lifted and I was then able to continue playing freely with any amounts and withdraw normally, exactly as had always happened previously on Slotozen.

I also confirm that during nearly three years on Slotozen, I was always able to continue playing and withdraw my winnings normally after completing wagering requirements, regardless of the type of bonus used, including free bonuses.

It is also interesting to note that today Slotozen now displays very visible limitations directly within its promotional offers.

For example, in a promotional VIP email I received on May 21st 2026, the following was clearly stated:

"50 Free Spins 🎰

Min deposit €35 · Wagering ×10 · Max cashout €500"

This demonstrates that Slotozen now considers it necessary to display these withdrawal limitations clearly and visibly in its promotions.

However, this level of visibility, clarity and transparency simply did not exist previously regarding the bonuses I used over the years.

This is precisely why the current situation appears inconsistent, deeply unfair and completely contrary to the way bonuses and withdrawals had always functioned on my account before.

It is also important to remember that players have absolutely no access to previous archived versions of the casino’s terms and conditions or to the internal changes made over time. Only Slotozen possesses this information.

Therefore, it should be the casino’s responsibility to transparently provide:

– the exact versions of the terms and conditions applicable at the time of the winnings;

– the precise dates when these rules were modified;

– proof that these limitations were clearly visible and effectively applied before this dispute;

– and a clear explanation as to why both the payment rules and bonus interpretations suddenly changed after my large winnings.

At this point, several rules appear to have been modified, reinterpreted or reinforced after the winnings in order to reduce or delay payments owed.

Today, I sincerely feel that Slotozen is taking advantage of the current situation and of Casino Guru’s public position regarding this dispute in order to block or delay payments without any real consequence.

Kind regards,

******* ******

Dear Matej,

As previously stated, the player’s withdrawal transactions are processed in accordance with the applicable Terms and Conditions that were in effect at the relevant time. These limits have not been changed in relation to this case.

At present, our withdrawal limits are clearly stated in the Terms and Conditions as follows:

• Daily: €5,000
• Weekly (rolling 7-day): €10,000
• Monthly: €20,000

Accordingly, the currently applicable monthly withdrawal limit remains €20,000, and the player’s withdrawal transactions are processed in accordance with this limit and the applicable Terms and Conditions.

Best regards,

Slotozen Casino Team

Bonjour Matej,

Je souhaite revenir une nouvelle fois sur ce dossier, car j’ai le sentiment que plusieurs éléments essentiels et particulièrement graves ne sont toujours pas réellement pris en compte dans cette affaire.

Le problème aujourd’hui ne concerne plus uniquement la règle du x10 invoquée par Slotozen, mais surtout le fait que le casino a pratiquement cessé tous les paiements alors que, pendant des mois, des conditions VIP très différentes ont été clairement appliquées à mon compte.

Pendant une longue période, Slotozen a toujours confirmé et appliqué des paiements correspondant approximativement à :

– environ 20 000 € par semaine

– jusqu’à 60 000 € par mois

Les paiements réellement effectués sur mon compte bancaire le démontrent clairement :

– Janvier : environ 59 000 €

– Février : environ 62 800 €

– Mars : environ 42 000 €

– Avril : seulement 36 000 €

– Mai : seulement 20 000 €

– Depuis le 9 mai : plus aucun paiement malgré plus de 84 000 € encore impayés.

Aujourd’hui, Slotozen affirme soudainement que la limite applicable serait uniquement de 20 000 € par mois.

Cette situation est extrêmement problématique, car cette limitation n’était absolument pas appliquée de cette manière auparavant sur mon compte. Au contraire, pendant des années, des paiements beaucoup plus élevés ont été validés et effectués par le casino, alors même que j’ai également subi des pertes extrêmement importantes sur cette plateforme.

Le fait que je ne joue plus aujourd’hui est directement lié à ce litige :

– Slotozen a retiré environ 100 000 € de mon solde ;

– les paiements ont ensuite été fortement ralentis puis pratiquement arrêtés ;

– et aucune solution concrète n’a été proposée depuis des semaines.

Concernant maintenant la confiscation des 100 000 €, je rappelle que le bonus concerné provenait de points de fidélité obtenus grâce à des dépôts en argent réel effectués sans bonus.

Ce bonus de 700 € comportait :

– une condition de mise x25 ;

– une limite de mise maximale de 5 €.

Une fois cette condition de mise intégralement complétée, j’ai continué à jouer normalement comme cela s’était toujours produit auparavant sur mon compte depuis près de trois ans.

Slotozen affirme désormais avoir appliqué une règle générale limitant les retraits à 10 fois le montant du bonus, soit environ 7 000 € maximum pour un bonus de 700 €, et c’est sur cette base qu’environ 100 000 € ont été retirés de mon solde sans avertissement préalable ni préavis.

Le problème fondamental est que cette règle n’a jamais été appliquée de cette manière auparavant sur mon compte, malgré des années d’utilisation de bonus et de bonus gratuits.

Il est également très important de constater qu’aujourd’hui Slotozen affiche désormais de manière très visible certaines limitations directement dans ses nouveaux emails promotionnels VIP, notamment :

"50 Free Spins 🎰 Min deposit €35 · Wagering ×10 · Max cashout €500"

Cette visibilité très claire des limitations n’existait pas auparavant concernant les bonus utilisés sur mon compte.

Cela renforce fortement l’impression que les règles ont été modifiées, renforcées ou réinterprétées après mes gains importants.

À ce jour, Casino Guru n’a jamais réellement demandé au casino :

– à quelle date exacte cette règle x10 aurait été introduite ;

– quelle version exacte des conditions générales était applicable au moment des gains ;

– ni la preuve que cette limitation était réellement visible et clairement communiquée au joueur au moment de l’utilisation du bonus concerné.

Or seul Slotozen possède l’historique des anciennes conditions générales et des modifications internes effectuées au fil du temps.

Dans ces conditions, il me paraît indispensable que le casino fournisse enfin :

– les anciennes versions exactes des conditions applicables ;

– les dates précises de modification ;

– et la preuve que cette limitation x10 existait réellement et était clairement affichée avant ce litige.

Aujourd’hui, j’ai sincèrement le sentiment que Slotozen a profité du temps gagné pendant cette procédure pour ralentir fortement les paiements, modifier ou renforcer certaines conditions, puis justifier rétroactivement des décisions extrêmement lourdes financièrement.

Compte tenu des montants en jeu — environ 84 000 € toujours impayés et 100 000 € retirés du solde — cette situation doit impérativement cesser et être examinée avec beaucoup plus de sérieux et de fermeté.

Cordialement,

******* ********

Hello Matej,

I would like to understand why the key issues I have been raising for several weeks remain unanswered.

The main issue today is that Slotozen repeatedly stated and applied withdrawal conditions corresponding to approximately €20,000 per week and up to €60,000 per month on my VIP account for many months. I already explained this in detail in my previous message, together with the payment history demonstrating that these conditions were actually applied.

Now, Slotozen suddenly claims that the applicable limit is only €20,000 per month.

I do not believe it is acceptable for a casino to simply change or reinterpret withdrawal conditions after significant winnings have been generated, especially when different conditions were communicated and applied over a long period of time.

Withdrawals should be processed according to the conditions that were in effect and applied at the time the winnings were generated, not according to limitations that are being invoked months later during this dispute.

Regarding the confiscation of approximately €100,000, Casino Guru has still not asked:

– which exact version of the Terms and Conditions was applicable at the time the winnings were generated;

– on what exact date the alleged "maximum cashout x10" rule was introduced;

– where this limitation was displayed when the bonus was granted;

– or why this rule was never enforced previously despite several years of bonus usage on my account.

Only Slotozen has access to historical versions of its Terms and Conditions and records of internal changes made over time.

Therefore, before accepting the casino's current statements, I believe it is essential to require concrete evidence regarding the rules that were actually applicable at the time of the winnings, as well as the withdrawal conditions that were communicated and applied to my account.

At present, approximately €84,000 remains unpaid and approximately €100,000 has been removed from my balance.

Considering the amounts involved, I respectfully request that Slotozen be required to honor the withdrawal conditions that it itself communicated and applied for many months, and that it finally provide evidence regarding the alleged x10 rule.

Kind regards,

******** ********

Dear Metzinger,

When I last reviewed the terms and conditions, I noted that the latest update version available at that time appeared to predate the occurrence of this issue.

However, I would kindly ask the casino representative to provide a clear and detailed response to the following questions:

Dear Casino Representative,

• Could you please confirm whether the rule regarding maximum winnings from free spins was already included in the terms prior to Metzinger’s participation in the mentioned bonus? If possible, could you also specify since when this rule has been in effect?
• Could you please explain how the withdrawal limits for VIP players are structured? From my understanding, withdrawal limits may depend on player activity, particularly wagering levels, but we would appreciate clarification on the exact mechanism.
• Could you also clarify why this rule may not have been encountered by Metzinger previously? It is possible that he had primarily used different types of bonuses rather than free bonuses, but we would appreciate your confirmation.

Thank you very much for your assistance and clarification.

Dear Matej,

Thank you for your reply.

I would also like to draw your attention to an important statement made by Slotozen in Eugene's latest email received on 3 June 2026.

In that email, Eugene explicitly states that the higher withdrawal amounts previously processed on my account were reduced because of my recent lower activity and deposit levels.

However, this is entirely the consequence of Slotozen's own actions.

I stopped playing because approximately €100,000 were removed from my balance, payments were drastically slowed down, and the withdrawal conditions previously communicated and applied to my VIP account are no longer being respected.

Therefore, my reduced activity cannot be used as a justification to change the withdrawal conditions that were applied when the winnings were generated.

The winnings were obtained while Slotozen was repeatedly applying and communicating VIP withdrawal conditions of approximately €20,000 per week and up to €60,000 per month. These are the conditions that should be respected, and payments should immediately resume according to those conditions.

I respectfully submit that Slotozen cannot rely on my reduced activity today when that reduced activity is itself the direct consequence of the confiscation of approximately €100,000 and the failure to process withdrawals according to the conditions applied at the time of the winnings.

Regarding the disputed €100,000, I maintain that these funds should be returned and paid. The alleged x10 maximum cashout rule was never applied in this manner on my account despite years of bonus usage, and it was not displayed or communicated to me when the bonus was granted.

To date, no evidence has been provided showing that this limitation was clearly visible and applicable when the bonus was awarded.

I therefore respectfully request that Slotozen be required to:

immediately resume payments according to the withdrawal conditions applied when the winnings were generated;

process the delayed withdrawals that should already have been paid;

return and pay the disputed €100,000;

provide proof that the alleged x10 rule was clearly visible and applicable when the bonus was granted.

Kind regards,

******* ********

Dear Matej,

Thank you for your questions.

We are happy to provide further clarification regarding the matters raised.

Maximum winnings rule

We can confirm that the maximum winnings rule applicable to bonus funds was already in effect at the time the player received, wagered, and completed the bonus in question.

The player's balance adjustment was performed in accordance with the Bonus Terms and Conditions that were applicable to the bonus at the time of participation. As previously explained, the relevant rule provides that winnings generated from certain bonus types are subject to a maximum cashout limit, with any amount exceeding that limit being forfeited in accordance with the applicable bonus terms.

The adjustment applied to the player's balance was therefore not the result of a later rule change or retroactive application of terms, but rather the implementation of the bonus conditions governing the promotion under which the winnings were generated.

Why the player may not have encountered this rule previously

Based on our review of the player's history, there is no indication that the player was previously affected by this limitation simply because earlier bonus-related winnings did not exceed the applicable maximum cashout threshold.

In other words, while the same rule was applicable, previous bonus sessions did not generate winnings that required a balance adjustment under the maximum winnings provision. Therefore, the player may not have encountered the practical application of this rule before, despite it being part of the applicable bonus framework.

VIP withdrawal limits

Regarding the withdrawal limits referenced by the player, we can confirm that, at certain periods, the player may have benefited from enhanced withdrawal arrangements associated with their VIP status and account history.

Such accommodations are discretionary in nature, may be account-specific, and can be provided by the VIP team on an exceptional basis. However, these arrangements do not supersede the official Terms & Conditions and should not be interpreted as a permanent entitlement or a modification of the withdrawal framework applicable to the account.

The Terms & Conditions remain the governing document at all times, and withdrawal processing is ultimately subject to the applicable operational, compliance, and payment procedures.

At present, the player's withdrawal requests continue to be processed in accordance with the limits and procedures set out in the Terms & Conditions.

We trust this clarifies the matters raised. Should you require any additional information or supporting documentation, please let us know and we will be happy to assist further.

Kind regards,

Slotozen Casino Team

Dear Matej,

Thank you for the casino's reply.

However, the fundamental issues remain unresolved.

Regarding the approximately €100,000 removed from my balance, Slotozen continues to rely on an alleged x10 maximum cashout rule while still providing no actual evidence.

To date, the casino has failed to provide:

the exact Bonus Terms applicable at the time the bonus was granted;

proof that the alleged x10 maximum cashout rule was clearly visible and communicated to me;

the date from which this rule was in force.

I can also confirm that during several years of playing at Slotozen and using various bonuses, including free bonuses, I never saw any visible x10 maximum cashout limitation attached to the bonuses I received.

In fact, it is only recently that Slotozen has started displaying such limitations clearly in its promotional offers.

For example, in a VIP promotional email received on 21 May 2026, Slotozen explicitly stated:

"50 Free Spins 🎰 | Min Deposit €35 | Wagering ×10 | Max Cashout €500"

This clearly demonstrates that Slotozen now considers it necessary to prominently display maximum cashout limitations directly within its promotions.

I can confirm that this level of visibility did not exist on the bonuses I received previously, including the bonus that led to this dispute.

Furthermore, Slotozen itself admits that enhanced VIP withdrawal conditions were applied to my account for months due to my VIP status and account history.

The winnings were generated while those conditions were being applied.

The casino cannot apply withdrawal conditions corresponding to approximately €20,000 per week and up to €60,000 per month for months, allow winnings to be generated under those conditions, and then suddenly revert to €20,000 per month after the winnings exist.

The fact that I no longer play is entirely the consequence of Slotozen's own actions: approximately €100,000 were removed from my balance and the withdrawal conditions previously applied to my account were no longer respected.

At this stage, enough time has been lost.

Without clear written evidence proving that the alleged x10 rule was visible and applicable at the time of the bonus, there is no valid basis for confiscating approximately €100,000.

Slotozen should stop delaying this matter, immediately pay the outstanding withdrawals, immediately restore and pay the approximately €100,000 removed from my balance, and finally honour the withdrawal conditions that were applied when these winnings were generated.

The casino has had ample time to justify its position. It is now time to pay what is owed.

Kind regards,

J***** M*******

Dear Matej,

A few additional comments regarding Slotozen's latest reply.

The three points raised by the casino still remain unsupported by evidence.

1. Maximum winnings rule

Slotozen claims that the alleged x10 maximum cashout rule existed at the time of the bonus.

I dispute this. This limitation was never displayed when the bonus was granted, never communicated to me, and never applied during several years of using all types of bonuses, including free bonuses.

Furthermore, Slotozen only recently started clearly displaying "Max Cashout" limitations in its promotions, notably in the VIP email of 21 May 2026.

I therefore request that Slotozen provide the Bonus Terms and Conditions in force on 1 December 2025, 1 January 2026 and 1 February 2026, together with proof that this alleged x10 rule was visible and applicable.

2. Why I allegedly never encountered this rule before

Slotozen claims that, according to its analysis of my account history, I never exceeded the alleged threshold previously.

I also dispute this statement.

This is merely an assertion without evidence. I therefore request that Slotozen provide the analysis and supporting documents on which this claim is based.

3. VIP withdrawal limits

Slotozen now admits that enhanced VIP withdrawal conditions were applied to my account.

These conditions were repeatedly communicated and applied while the winnings were generated.

The casino cannot apply withdrawal conditions corresponding to approximately €60,000 per month for months and then suddenly revert to €20,000 per month once significant winnings exist and remain unpaid.

At this stage, explanations have been provided, but no evidence.

I therefore maintain my request that Slotozen provide the requested proof, immediately restore and pay the approximately €100,000 removed from my balance, and process the outstanding withdrawals, including the delayed payments, according to the conditions applied when the winnings were generated.

Kind regards,

J***** M*******

Dear all,

My name is Michal, and as Matej is no longer available to continue moderating this case, it has been reassigned to me. Please be assured that I will handle the matter with the appropriate level of attention and transparency it requires.

Dear METZINGER,

I understand why you are continuing to seek every possible argument in support of your position. From your perspective, the outcome has significant implications, and it is entirely natural to want to ensure that every aspect of the case has been properly considered and that your concerns have been fully heard.

However, after carefully reviewing all of the responses provided, as well as the information shared with me by Matej regarding your previous email exchanges, I have gained the impression that some of the clarifications already given may not have been fully taken into account by you.

You are, of course, entirely within your rights to disagree with the explanations and conclusions reached. I respect that you may view the circumstances differently. At the same time, a difference in opinion does not, in itself, change the facts established during the investigation, the operational framework or the valid reasons that led to the actions taken in this case.

Having said that, I can also understand your concerns regarding the level of detail provided by the casino. I agree that greater transparency and more extensive (if legally possible) evidence sharing from the casino team could have offered additional reassurance and contributed to a better understanding of the basis for its decision.

Please be assured that your arguments and concerns have been and still are carefully considered throughout the review process. I do hope that we will be able to reach a well-informed conclusion in a reasonable time.

Dear Slotozen Casino Team,

Thank you for the clarification you have provided thus far.

Could you please address the player's latest concerns in a clear and comprehensive manner, including providing any evidence that is appropriate and permissible to be shared publicly in the complaint thread.

Should certain evidence not be suitable for public disclosure due to confidentiality or data protection considerations, I can mark the relevant posts as private so that they are visible only to the player, your team, and Casino Guru. Alternatively, you may provide the supporting documentation directly to me at michal.k@casino.guru for the purposes of an independent review.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation. I look forward to your response.

Dear Michal,

Thank you for your follow-up.

To date, Slotozen has provided only unverified assertions without any supporting evidence.

I fully agree that complete transparency and documentary evidence are necessary.

In the absence of such evidence, the confiscation of approximately €100,000 remains entirely unsubstantiated and should be reversed.

Accordingly, Slotozen should now provide without further delay:

Contractual Evidence

The exact Terms and Conditions, including Bonus Terms, that were in force on 1 December 2025, 1 January 2026 and 1 February 2026.

Technical Proof of Disclosure

System logs, screenshots or equivalent records demonstrating that the alleged Max Cashout x10 rule was clearly displayed and communicated at the exact moment of the Comp Points exchange.

Historical Audit

The account history, analysis and supporting records on which the casino relies when claiming that I had never previously exceeded the alleged threshold.

Furthermore, your latest reply does not address the issue of the outstanding withdrawals, which remains a central aspect of this dispute.

Slotozen has expressly acknowledged that enhanced VIP withdrawal limits of approximately €20,000 per week and €60,000 per month were applied to my account. These were the conditions under which the disputed winnings were generated.

The casino cannot apply those withdrawal conditions for months, allow winnings to be generated under them, and then subsequently reduce payments once those winnings become payable.

For approximately two months, Slotozen has failed to respect those withdrawal conditions and has significantly delayed payments that should already have been processed.

Conclusion and Requests

The approximately €100,000 removed from my balance should be immediately restored and paid.

All outstanding withdrawals should immediately resume according to the VIP withdrawal conditions that were applied when the winnings were generated.

Slotozen must now either provide the documentary and technical evidence requested by Casino Guru or immediately honour its outstanding financial obligations.

Kind regards,

J**** M******

Hello,

Thank you for the opportunity to provide further clarification regarding the points raised by the player.

We appreciate the player's perspective; however, we would like to address each point individually and provide additional context regarding the applicable Terms and Conditions and the handling of this case.

1. Maximum Winnings Rule

The player disputes the applicability of the maximum winnings rule and requests historical versions of the Bonus Terms and Conditions.

We can confirm that the maximum winnings provision applicable to the player's bonus was in force at the time the relevant promotion was activated, wagered, and completed.

The player's disputed balance originated from the bonus "comp_points_exchange_n9", which falls under the category of Comppoints bonuses.

The applicable Bonus Terms explicitly state:

"The maximum winnings that will be paid out resulting from any cash bonus, cashback, personal bonus, free chip bonus (including, but not limited to Welcome Package, Weekend Reload, Special Bonuses for VIP Levels, Comppoints, Tournament wins, Lottery wins, etc.) will equal the bonus amount multiplied by 10 unless otherwise stated."

The Terms further specify:

"Any winnings exceeding this amount will be forfeited upon withdrawal or after 24h after bonus wagering. Please note that until withdrawal of relevant balance is processed, funds on the balance will be considered subject to the maximum winnings rule."

Accordingly, the maximum winnings rule expressly applies to Comppoints bonuses and remains in effect after wagering completion until the relevant balance is withdrawn or otherwise settled.

We would also respectfully clarify that the applicability of bonus conditions is determined by the Bonus Terms and Conditions themselves and does not depend on the presence or absence of additional notifications, promotional banners, emails, or pop-up messages.

Any supplementary communication regarding bonus mechanics is informational in nature and does not create, modify, or override the governing Terms and Conditions accepted by the player upon participation.

The phrase "unless otherwise stated" simply allows for certain promotions to provide alternative maximum cashout limits where specifically indicated. In the absence of such an alternative condition, the standard x10 rule applies.

Therefore, the balance adjustment performed on the player's account was made strictly in accordance with the Bonus Terms applicable to the promotion.

2. Previous Bonus Activity

The player states that they had never previously encountered the maximum winnings rule.

Our review of the player's account history indicates that previous bonus participation did not result in winnings exceeding the applicable maximum cashout thresholds.

As a result, the rule was not triggered in prior instances.

The fact that a specific condition was not previously activated does not indicate that it did not exist or was not applicable.

The player previously exercised their GDPR rights and received a complete account and gameplay history, which contains the relevant information regarding prior bonus participation and outcomes.

This data allows the player to independently review their historical activity and verify that previous bonus winnings remained within the applicable thresholds.

3. VIP Withdrawal Limits

The player refers to withdrawal amounts previously communicated by their VIP manager and suggests that these conditions should continue indefinitely.

We would like to clarify that VIP withdrawal arrangements are reviewed on an ongoing basis and do not constitute permanent account entitlements.

Any enhanced withdrawal conditions that may have been applied to the player's account in the past were discretionary VIP accommodations provided at that time and should not be interpreted as guaranteed or contractual withdrawal limits applicable indefinitely.

As with all VIP benefits, such arrangements may be adjusted periodically based on various factors, including but not limited to account activity, commercial considerations, operational requirements, risk management, and internal policy reviews.

Importantly, any temporary VIP accommodations granted previously did not exceed the withdrawal limits established by our Terms and Conditions.

At present, the player's withdrawals continue to be processed in accordance with the standard limits applicable to the account under the Terms and Conditions.

Accordingly, the fact that higher withdrawal amounts may have been processed previously does not create an obligation for the casino to maintain identical withdrawal conditions indefinitely.

We trust this clarifies our position and remain available should any further information be required.

Kind regards,

Slotozen Casino Team

Dear Michal,

Thank you for your follow-up.

Despite multiple requests, Slotozen still has not provided the evidence necessary to support its position.

The casino has not provided:

the Terms and Conditions and Bonus Terms in force on 1 December 2025, 1 January 2026 and 1 February 2026;

any proof that the alleged Max Cashout x10 rule was clearly visible and communicated when the Comp Points bonus was granted;

the analysis and supporting records on which it relies when claiming that I never previously exceeded the alleged threshold.

Regarding the bonus itself, the x25 wagering requirement was fully completed. After completing those wagering requirements, I continued playing normally with what I understood to be withdrawable funds, exactly as had always been the case during several years of bonus use on my account.

The casino now relies on an alleged x10 rule to confiscate approximately €100,000, yet still provides no evidence that this rule was clearly displayed or communicated at the time of the bonus.

Regarding withdrawals, Slotozen acknowledges that VIP withdrawal conditions of approximately €20,000 per week and €60,000 per month were applied to my account for many months. These are the conditions under which the winnings were generated. The casino cannot apply those conditions while the winnings are being generated and then disregard them once the payments become due.

For approximately two months, Slotozen has failed to respect those withdrawal conditions, leaving approximately €84,000 unpaid.

At present, approximately €100,000 remain confiscated and approximately €84,000 remain unpaid.

In the absence of the requested evidence, there is no valid basis for the confiscation of the €100,000. These funds should be immediately restored and paid, and all outstanding withdrawals should be processed according to the withdrawal conditions that were applied when the winnings were generated.

Slotozen has now had every opportunity to provide proof. It is now time to reach a conclusion based on evidence rather than unsupported assertions.

Kind regards,

J**** M****

Dear METZINGER,

Thank you for the response.

Dear Slotozen Casino Team,

Please forward the relevant evidence supporting your claims for our independent review so that we can reach an informed decision regarding this case. At this stage, I feel that further communication is unlikely to be productive, as both parties appear to maintain their respective positions.

Please provide all the supporting documentation directly to me at michal.k@casino.guru.

Dear Michal,

We have provided a detailed response regarding this case directly via email.

Could you please review the information we have submitted and let us know if any additional clarification is required from our side?

We remain available should you have any further questions.

Kind regards,

Slotozen Casino Team

Thank you for providing all the information and evidence, Slotozen Casino Team.

Dear METZINGER,

I have now received and reviewed all information and evidence related to this matter, and the available evidence supports the course of events that has been explained to you on multiple occasions, as I have also been informed by the casino.

The disputed winnings do indeed stem from the "comp_points_exchange_n9" bonus, which, as previously communicated to you, falls under the category of Comp Points bonuses.

Regarding your concern as to whether the applicable rules were in place at the relevant time, this has also been confirmed by the casino.

I have also made efforts to verify the historical versions of the casino’s terms and bonus rules through publicly available sources, and I was able to locate the following:

Additionally, your account history quite clearly shows that your previous bonus participation did not result in winnings exceeding the applicable maximum cashout limits.

As such, the relevant rule was simply not triggered in those earlier instances.

The fact that a specific rule or condition was not activated previously does not indicate or mean that it did not exist or was not applicable at the time. Rather, it reflects that the circumstances necessary for its application had not arisen.

I believe this matter has now been sufficiently clarified, and that you have received the winnings in the amount to which you were entitled.

Regarding the withdrawals and the limits applied, the evidence again confirms that the previously higher withdrawal limits were permitted because, at that time, you held a VIP level that entitled you to enhanced withdrawal conditions, and your VIP manager was able to have them approved for you. As explained earlier, such benefits are subject to periodic review and may be adjusted based on various factors.

Since you no longer met the criteria required for those enhanced limits, your withdrawal limits were rightfully adjusted to the standard limits applicable to players at your current level.

I understand that this may be disappointing from your perspective. However, dissatisfaction with such changes does not exempt any player from meeting the relevant criteria. There is no inherent entitlement to maintain a higher VIP level or its associated benefits indefinitely without continuing to satisfy the applicable requirements. Similar principles apply across many other industries, including banking, insurance, retail loyalty programmes, and other membership-based services.

While it is true that certain withdrawal attempts were unsuccessful due to unforeseen issues on the payment provider’s side, the evidence shows that the casino informed you of these issues in a transparent manner, after which new withdrawal requests were submitted accordingly. Furthermore, some withdrawal requests were cancelled directly by you.

That said, it is important to note that the majority of your withdrawal requests were processed in accordance with the casino’s withdrawal policy.

While you are free to submit multiple withdrawal requests (as long as the casino's system allows that), the casino is only "required" to process withdrawals up to the limits applicable within the relevant timeframe. Any requests exceeding those limits may be cancelled or postponed. This is a standard practice across the industry.

After reviewing all information and evidence provided by both parties, I have not identified any actions by the casino that would be inconsistent with the applicable rules, industry-standard practices, or that we would consider unfair.

Furthermore, I have also been informed that you already submitted this complaint to the casino’s designated ADR body, which reportedly reached a similar conclusion.

In this regard, I would appreciate clarification as to why this was not disclosed during our communication?

This being said, I believe that any further discussion regarding this matter has become unnecessary, as the relevant facts are clear and there is nothing further to add.

Please let me know if you require assistance with anything else or whether I may proceed with closing this case.

Dear Michal,

Thank you for your reply.

I respectfully but firmly disagree with your conclusion.

To date, I have never been provided with the documentary or technical evidence on which you state your conclusion is based.

I repeatedly requested:

the exact Terms and Conditions and Bonus Terms applicable on 1 December 2025, 1 January 2026 and 1 February 2026;

proof that the alleged Max Cashout x10 rule was clearly visible and communicated when the Comp Points bonus was granted;

the date from which this alleged rule came into force;

the account analysis and supporting records on which Slotozen claims that I had never previously exceeded the alleged threshold.

None of these documents has ever been disclosed to me.

Consequently, I have had no opportunity to examine or challenge the evidence on which your conclusion relies.

Regarding the bonus itself, the x25 wagering requirement was fully completed and validated by the casino's own system. My loyalty page clearly displayed the wagering requirement but contained absolutely no visible reference to any Max Cashout x10 limitation.

Furthermore, Slotozen only recently started displaying "Max Cashout" limitations prominently in its promotional offers, which reinforces my position that this alleged limitation was not presented to players with the same visibility at the time my bonus was granted.

Regarding the withdrawals, I also disagree with your assessment.

This is not simply a matter of VIP status. Slotozen repeatedly communicated and applied withdrawal conditions of approximately €20,000 per week and up to €60,000 per month. Their VIP team expressly explained that substantial withdrawals could not be paid in a single transaction and would therefore be processed progressively under those conditions.

These were the conditions under which my winnings were generated.

The casino cannot apply those conditions for months, allow the winnings to be generated under those conditions, and then unilaterally abandon them once payment becomes due.

Today, approximately €64,000 remain unpaid solely because Slotozen no longer respects the withdrawal conditions that were communicated and consistently applied to my account.

Accordingly, without the documentary and technical evidence repeatedly requested, I consider your conclusion to be null and void. A decision cannot reasonably be based solely on the casino's assertions while the player has never been given access to the evidence on which that decision relies.

I therefore cannot accept your conclusion.

As far as I am concerned, this matter is not closed. I reserve all my rights to pursue every available legal and regulatory remedy until Slotozen is required to produce the requested evidence, restore the approximately €100,000 removed from my balance, and honour the withdrawal conditions that were communicated and applied when my winnings were generated.

Kind regards,

J**** M*****

Dear METZINGER,

Thank you for your response.

While you undoubtedly have the right to your own opinion on the situation, this does not necessarily mean it reflects the correct interpretation of the facts or that it's the correct one. Despite the detailed explanations provided above, it appears that you continue to focus only on your own position while overlooking or perhaps ignoring the information and justification already presented.

As such, we have reached a point where further discussion is no longer productive, as the already presented or any additional clarification does not appear to be meaningfully considered.

It should also be noted that the casino team mentioned this:

The player previously exercised their GDPR rights and received a complete account and gameplay history, which contains the relevant information regarding prior bonus participation and outcomes.

Accordingly, the relevant supporting data has already been made available to you. Any additional historical or internal data from the casino’s own systems is considered sensitive information. In line with standard industry practices, there is no general obligation to disclose such data directly to individual players. Where required, this data may be shared exclusively with competent regulatory authorities or recognised dispute resolution bodies for the purpose of independent review.

As an independent entity, I have reviewed all the gathered information and evidence from both sides thoroughly. I have not identified any grounds to consider the casino’s actions in violation of their applicable rules, industry-standard or fair practices. Consequently, I have no alternative but to close this case as Rejected.

You certainly have the right to disagree with this conclusion and can reach out to the casino licensing authority, the appropriate authority in your jurisdiction, or even consider legal action if you still feel justified in your position, but we are unable to offer any additional assistance regarding this issue. Feel free to let me know of the authorities' decision, should you opt for this route at michal.k@casino.guru.

Should you encounter any issues with this or any other casino in the future, please feel free to reach out to us, and we will try our best to help.

Best regards,

Michal

Casino Guru