Crypto Loko Casino Review

The player from Chile had his withdrawal cancelled without any explanation and all his winnings had disappeared. He had sought clarification on why his withdrawal was cancelled and his money was not returned to his account. However, before the Complaints Team could fully investigate the issue, the player had requested the case to be closed, stating he no longer wished to play at the casino. As per his request, we had rejected the complaint.

The player from Mexico had used a no-deposit bonus and made a deposit of 21 USD to verify their cryptocurrency wallet for a planned withdrawal. Despite having seen the approved withdrawal of 250 USD split into two parts in their history, only the deposit of 21 USD was reflected in their account. The casino had alleged violation of bonus terms as the reason, which the player disputed. However, after reviewing the evidence provided by the player, we concluded that the player had indeed violated the bonus terms by using more than one no-deposit bonus before making a real money deposit. As a result, the casino acted within its rights to void the winnings and refund the player's deposit. The player was given time to respond or provide additional information but failed to do so, leading us to close the complaint as unjustified.

The player from the US had expressed disappointment with advertised prizes for deposits over $50 that appeared to be expired and unusable. The player had won a $50 free chip which was expired when he tried to redeem it. We had asked the player several questions to further understand the issue and had extended the response time by 7 days. However, due to the lack of response from the player, we were unable to proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Arizona had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting the complaint. The payment hadn't been processed yet. We had advised the player to wait at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before submitting a complaint, as delays could occur due to unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. We had offered to intervene if the withdrawal was not received within this timeframe. However, the player did not respond to our follow-up messages, leading to our inability to investigate further. Consequently, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Israel, whose documents had been verified and approved by the casino, had won $1700. However, the casino had closed his account without providing access to live chat or responding to his emails. The casino had claimed that the account was deactivated due to multiple accounts related to the player, which was contrary to the casino's terms and conditions. Despite numerous follow-ups from the Complaints Team, the casino had failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their claim. The issue had remained unresolved as the casino did not respond to the team's final request for clarification. The casino's rating might have been negatively affected due to the unresolved complaint.

The player from Argentina had participated in cryptoloco's referral program, winning 500 from the referral. However, the player had only been able to withdraw a maximum of 72, which was the amount of the referral bonus. After the player's complaint, the issue had been escalated by the Casino Guru team. The casino had initially made an error regarding the maximum cashout for the free chip, but after an internal review, the remaining funds were approved for withdrawal. The casino had confirmed that the payment was sent to the player's Bitcoin address. After some delay and further communication with the casino, the player had confirmed receiving the payment in his BTC wallet. The complaint had then been successfully resolved.

The player from the US had faced problems related to withdrawal cancellation. Having fulfilled the wagering requirements and sought to withdraw $100, they found their request cancelled without explanation. The player received no response from the casino to several attempts at communication over a week, despite receiving frequent promotional emails from the casino. We had asked the player for additional information regarding the use of consecutive free bonuses, as this could have been a potential reason for the withdrawal cancellation according to the casino's terms and conditions. However, the player did not respond to our inquiries, and as a result, we were unable to further investigate or provide potential solutions to the issue.

The player from Albania had been waiting for a withdrawal for three months. Despite having met the wagering requirements for a no-deposit bonus, he was asked to deposit while his account verification was still pending. The player had attempted to send his verification documents via email, as the casino's on-site identification app was not functioning, but he hadn't received any response. The player decided to make a deposit to facilitate the withdrawal. However, after making the deposit, his winnings were confiscated by the casino, which claimed he had taken his third no-deposit offer. The player's account was verified, but he wasn't satisfied with the casino's actions. We had closed the complaint upon the player's request, but it was reopened later, and the player was not satisfied with the outcome. The complaint was eventually rejected due to the player's non-response to our messages and questions.

The player from Kentucky had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting his complaint. His money hadn't been received yet. The Complaints Team had advised the player that withdrawal processing could take a few days or weeks, and suggested waiting at least 14 days before submitting a complaint. The team had also offered to intervene if the player's account was verified, his gaming history checked, and his withdrawal approved by the casino, but he still hadn't received his winnings after 14 days. However, due to the player's lack of response to further inquiries, we were unable to proceed with the investigation and the complaint was subsequently rejected.

The player from the US had reached winnings of $1,854.46 from a $33 coupon. However, the winnings had suddenly dropped to $24 and a transaction of "coupon reversal withdrawal approved, -$1854.46" had appeared in his account history. The Complaints Team had confirmed that the casino's terms and conditions limited the maximum withdrawal from a No Deposit Bonus to 1 times the face value of the bonus. The casino representative had provided proof that the player had received $33 after the coupon reversal withdrawal, but he had lost the funds in the process. Therefore, the Complaints Team could not assist further and the complaint was rejected.

The player from the Philippines had deposited funds for KYC verification, but the deposit had not been credited to his account. Despite having reached out to customer service, he had received false information, which led to claims of the casino being a scam. The Complaints Team had advised the player to contact his payment provider for investigation, as the casino had no control over the deposit. The player had provided a transaction ID for a deposit, but it was not found on Blockchain.com or Blockchair.com, suggesting that the casino had not received any deposit. The casino had confirmed that they had not received any funds from the player. The transaction itself exists in the Polygon network, but there are still some doubts about the actual address to which the funds supposedly were sent. The Complaints Team and the casino had continued to investigate the issue, but the player's account was closed during the process. The casino confirmed that no successful deposits had been made to the player's account. The Complaints Team concluded that they were unable to assist further due to the complexity of crypto transactions and the lack of funds received by the casino. The complaint was rejected due to the player's lack of response.

The player from California was upset with the withdrawal process despite the casino's advertisement of instant withdrawals. Upon multiple inquiries, the casino had kept extending the waiting period, then stated it took 7-10 business days for approval and another 7-10 for payment. The player also complained about the casino's cryptocurrency practices, stating that they only allowed Bitcoin withdrawals despite accepting deposits in Litecoin. We advised the player to wait and keep us updated. However, the player did not respond to our further inquiries, leading us to reject the complaint.

The player from the US had faced multiple issues with an online casino. He had experienced withdrawal requests being cancelled without explanation, later approved in two differing amounts. Additionally, he had noticed a significant decrease in his account balance after placing a bet. The casino's customer service had not responded to his complaints. The player had claimed his winnings were accumulated with a 'no withdrawal limit' bonus and a deposit, with a maximum withdrawal limit of $6,600. However, the casino's rules had indicated that the maximum withdrawal amount from any No Deposit Bonus was only $50. Despite attempts to clarify the situation, the player ceased communication and the complaint was rejected due to lack of response.

The player from the US is unable to access their $1,000 in winnings due to an abrupt casino closure. The casino representative has informed us that the casino is operational but provided us with evidence that the player used multiple consecutive free chips without a deposit. This violates the casino terms and conditions therefore we have rejected the complaint.

The player from Lebanon won through a free bonus at cryptoloko online casino. Despite meeting playthrough requirements and providing documents requested by the casino, their withdrawal request was rejected. After being informed the withdrawal was approved, their account was blocked suddenly. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from Arizona had made several deposits and subsequent withdrawal requests at Crypto Loko Casino, but they had all been canceled or rejected. After the player's complaint, we had communicated with the casino on his behalf. The casino had claimed the funds were initially denied due to a "mixing funds" issue, which was their mistake. They corrected it by re-depositing the requested amount, minus a $48 cash credit already issued, into the player's account. The player had confirmed receiving the funds and expressed his satisfaction with the resolution. The issue was then considered resolved.

The player from California was waiting for a payout of $700. Despite having complied with the crypto withdrawal requirements, the casino had not processed the payment. We reached out to the player for more information about the withdrawal request, but did not receive a response. Due to the lack of communication from the player, we were unable to investigate the issue further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Arizona had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hadn't been received yet. The player had provided screenshots of the casino's rules, which stated a withdrawal should have been approved within a day and paid out immediately, or within 72 hours in unusual circumstances. The player had expressed frustration with the delay, which had exceeded a week. We had advised the player to wait for 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before escalating the issue. However, the player failed to respond to our subsequent messages, leading to the rejection of the complaint due to lack of further information.

The player from Texas, after receiving approval for a $2000 withdrawal, suddenly found himself unable to access his casino account without any clarification or notification. The Complaints Team had reached out to the player for more details to better understand the situation and had extended the complaint's timer by 7 days. However, due to the player's lack of response, we were unable to proceed with the investigation and were forced to reject the complaint.

The player from the United States attempted to withdraw their winnings two weeks ago, but the transaction keeps getting cancelled. The casino has responded only with an automated message. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Greece had reported a delayed payout of $1000 via Bitcoin from CryptoLoko casino. Despite the casino's claim of instant payouts, the player had been waiting for 5 days. The player expressed frustration with the casino's misleading marketing regarding their withdrawal speed. We had advised the player to wait for two weeks for the withdrawal to be processed. However, due to the player's lack of response to our follow-up messages, we were unable to proceed with the investigation. The complaint was therefore rejected.

The player from Michigan had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hadn't been processed yet. Despite having his account verified and making an additional payment as requested by the casino, he still hadn't received his winnings. Our team had extended the complaint resolution timer by 7 days, asking for further response from the player. However, due to a lack of response from the player, we couldn't investigate the issue further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United States had faced an issue when he attempted to redeem 1,300 USD into his crypto wallet. Instead, the withdrawal had been canceled by a manager and only 12 USD was received, leading to a loss of 1,288 USD. The player had claimed to have met the playthrough requirements of a bonus code, but the casino's terms and conditions stated that players could not redeem multiple free bonuses consecutively without making a real-money deposit in between. The player had activated several free bonuses without making any deposits, and therefore, we were unable to assist him further. The complaint was rejected due to the player's violation of the casino's bonus policy.

The player from Florida claims that the Crypto Loco casino has not paid out their winnings. Furthermore, the casino representatives are not responding to emails and the player has been removed from the live chat functionality. After we got in touch with a casino representative, it turned out that the player claimed 13 consecutive free chips without any cash deposits in between, therefore they were not eligible for winnings from the last used no deposit bonus. Unfortunately, we were forced to reject this complaint since the casino acted in accordance with its terms and conditions.

The player from Nevada had deposited $10 via a Bitcoin wallet and won $600. He had faced issues with multiple withdrawal attempts, with only a $19 withdrawal proving successful. After betting over $2000, his final balance had been $760.17. However, his attempts to withdraw were met with a 'manager withdrawal request' that zeroed his balance, with no communication from the casino. Despite our efforts to understand and resolve the issue, the player did not respond to our inquiries. Therefore, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Michigan has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Virginia reported a delayed withdrawal. This is the player's second withdrawal, and the issue persists past the casino's stated 7-day processing period. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from South Carolina is experiencing issues with depositing money into the casino via a cryptocurrency wallet. Despite contacting customer support, the issue remains unresolved. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from Iowa was playing on a bonus, hit a win and then the bonus was suddenly confiscated by the casino, despite not breaking any rules. We rejected the complaint because the casino provided evidence confirming the player had played their balance down to zero.

The player from Oregon is having ongoing issues with withdrawals. Despite multiple attempts to contact support via email, there has been no response and live chat is also disabled. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the United States fulfilled all wagering requirements and attempted to withdraw winnings. Despite regular contact with support and submitting ID for verification, all withdrawal attempts have been canceled without clear guidance. The player stopped responding to our questions and comments, so we had to reject the complaint.

The player from Virginia has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from the US is not able to withdraw her winnings. All withdrawal requests have been declined. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from the United States had a negative experience with Crypto Loko casino. They received a bonus offer, played through the wagering requirements, verified their identity, deposited $12, and attempted to withdraw $62. However, their withdrawal requests were consistently declined, and the casino displayed foul play. After our intervention, we were able to help the player to get their winnings. The player confirmed they received the funds in the end. The Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Washington has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the US requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment wasn't processed. We contacted the casino representative to comment the case and found out that the player had used several consequental free chips without making real money deposit between them therefore they were the winnings were not valid for a withdrawal. Based on the evidence from the casino, we were forced to reject the complaint.

The player from the US is experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings from a no-deposit bonus. Even though we assumed that the issue had been resolved, without a confirmation from the player, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from California requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Bulgaria had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. We found out that the winnings were made by claiming 5 consecutive free chips without making a single real money deposit in between, so the casino acted in complience with its terms deniyng the withdrawal requests. Therefore, we rejected the complaint.

The player from the United States has requested a withdrawal. Unfortunately, the payment seems to be delayed. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Minnesota submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from the US is dissatisfied that the casino reduced his winnings and then didn't send them to him. We later found out that the casino confiscated his winnings because he activated multiple no-deposit bonuses consecutively. We closed the complaint because this was in compliance with their bonus terms.

The player's unable to withdraw his balance due mixing funds with bonus. After some discussion, the casino reviewed the situation and decided that because they were able to differentiate between bonus funds and cash funds available, the player could be paid their balance on this occasion.

The player from the United States was experiencing difficulties with high unexpected withdrawal fees. Basically, the casino refunded him only his deposit due to a breach of the casino's Terms and Conditions. The player used multiple consecutive no-deposit bonuses without making deposits between them, which is prohibited. The winnings were obtained from the last bonus, and the deposit was made after. Besides that, there is a suspicion of using multiple accounts - at least 2 accounts were registered from the same household shortly after each other. Both used no-deposit bonuses. Therefore, the player is not entitled to the winnings obtained from the last no-deposit bonus, and we decided to close the complaint as unjustified. The casino acted correctly and in accordance with its rules.

The player from Singapore was not able to log into his account. It turns out that the player is from Australia, and he circumvented the casino's restrictions to hide his real location, and to be able to register and play in the casino. In addition, the player used several consecutive no-deposit bonuses without making deposits between them, which is forbidden according to the casino's rules. The casino refunded him with his confirmation deposit. The casino acted correctly and in accordance with its terms and conditions, and we accept its decision. The complainant is not entitled to the winnings obtained this way. Therefore, the complaint was closed as unjustified.

The player from Argentina played with a bonus. After requesting a withdrawal, the casino confiscated his winnings. The player allegedly mixed funds by depositing real money on top of the existing non-withdrawable balance. He was asked to wager the balance in accordance with the deposit mandatory wagering requirement, but later, the support found out the fact funds were mixed up, so his balance was reset to just his deposited money, and he was asked to wager it in the same way without a non-withdrawable balance. We tried to find out what happened with the funds that were confiscated during the balance reset, however, it is not clear where those funds originated, and in the meantime, the casino decided to restore the disputed funds. The complainant confirmed that the issue had been resolved.

The player from Argentina was accused of claiming multiple free bonuses in a row. the player confirmed this and therefore he wasn't eligible for the winnings. We rejected the complaint for this reason.

The player from Colorado submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from the US won from a no-deposit bonus, but her winnings were confiscated. The complaint was rejected because the casino provided us with relevant evidence of multiple accounts created by the player.

The player from the US has been blocked without further explanation. The casino stated that the player had their account blocked due to requesting chargebacks and using a VPN at sister casinos. It also came to light that the player had registered multiple accounts at these casinos. Consequently, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Pennsylvania has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from the United States requested a withdrawal three weeks prior to submitting this complaint. After getting in touch with the casino and checking the data from the Bitcoin wallet, the player confirmed the payout was successful.

The player's winnings were capped for having multiple accounts.The casino stated that the player did have a duplicate account, but the main issue was that the player had claimed multiple free bonuses in a row without making a deposit in between. As this is directly against the terms of the casino, the complaint was ultimately rejected.

The player from Pennsylvania has been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hasn’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Italy has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Their money hasn’t been received yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from New Zealand is experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to ongoing verification. After our intervention, we were able to help the player to get their winnings. The player confirmed they received the funds in the end. The Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Florida has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't fully understand the bonus terms and used rude abusing language towards our staff which is unacceptable.

The player from Texas has been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hasn’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Tunisia deposited on Yebo Casino, won 600 ZAR (approximately $30), and upon request for his winnings, his account was closed without any explanation. He asserts that he has not violated any terms and conditions. We closed the complaint as resolved since the player confirmed a successful resolution.

The player from South Africa has been accused of opening duplicate accounts. Admittedly, they opened and played in two different ones. The complaint was closed after the casino suspended the player's secondary account and allowed him to play and withdrawal on his main account.

The player from California had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks before submitting this complaint. Her money had not been received yet. After communicating with the Complaints Team, the player confirmed that she had received her winnings. However, she had expressed dissatisfaction with the casino's withdrawal speed, contrary to its claims of instant crypto withdrawals. The Complaints Team had explained that they did not handle complaints about false advertising unless it significantly affected the player, such as confiscation of winnings. Since the primary issue of delayed payment had been resolved, the complaint had been marked as 'resolved' by the team.

The player from South Africa is unable to reach the casino site due to a technical error. He has an outstanding withdrawal of 20K, as well as an account balance of 4K. Despite contacting and emailing support, the issue remains unresolved. The complaint was resolved as the site finished their maintenance.

The player from Texas requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Minnesota has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player's withdrawal was refused as the casino stated they were not eligible to use a bonus. After discussing the issue the player and the casino reached a mutual agreement and the issue was resolved.

The player from Finland played with a No Deposit bonus and requested a withdrawal. Later the casino canceled their winnings because players from Finland are not eligible for this bonus. The case, was successfully resolved.

The player from Italy has been informed he cannot withdraw winnings from a free spin bonus due to country restrictions. After contacting the casino, the player received his winnings and the complaint was successfully resolved.

The player from South Africa is unhappy with weekly withdrawal limits. After the player has accumulated substantial winnings, she was informed about R1,000 weekly withdrawal limit. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Namibia has requested a withdrawal. It has been withheld without further explanation. Player received her winnings with time delay because transfers to Namibian bank lasts longer than usual.

The player from Kansas had requested two withdrawals, both over $400, with the first one made on September 19. They could not access the casino's website due to password issues, which prevented them from checking the status of their withdrawals. The issue was resolved as the player received payments totaling $562.80, although they noted that the fees appeared high. The Complaints Team clarified that the fees were due to bonus fund deductions and a transaction fee, along with cryptocurrency market volatility. The complaint had been marked as 'resolved'.

The player from Texas requested a Bitcoin withdrawal on 08/14/2024, which remained unapproved despite her communication with the casino. While they claimed to escalate the issue, she received no resolution or response from a manager. After further inquiry, she confirmed receipt of her funds, although the amount was $1,910.86 instead of her expected $2,350 due to reversed charges on deposits. The issue was resolved with clarification from the casino regarding the deductions, and the complaint was marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from the US had deposited $96 to Raging Bull Casino but could not access the website. Additionally, he had a $500 withdrawal pending. The complaint was rejected due to the player's lack of response to the Complaints Team's inquiries, which prevented any further investigation or potential solutions. The issue was later reopened at the player's request, where he clarified that he had approximately $350 remaining in his account but was unable to log in due to restrictions. The Complaints Team was seeking supporting evidence regarding the player's balance to assist in resolving the matter. Ultimately, the issue was resolved after the player communicated with the casino, confirming that his account had been re-activated and access restored. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from the United States had requested three Bitcoin withdrawals totaling $3,000 in winnings, which were approved between June and July 2024. Despite repeated promises from the casino host, the player had not received the funds after over 45 days. After engaging with the Complaints Team, the player received $2,250 of the outstanding amount, and further assistance led to the eventual payment of the remaining $750. The issue was resolved, and the player confirmed receipt of all funds.

The player from Argentina requested a withdrawal on June 26, but it remained unapproved and unreviewed as of July 16. Casino support cited an exceeded payment limit requiring further review. After our intervention, the casino confirmed that the player's account was in order, and the withdrawal was processed. The player acknowledged receipt of the payment, and the complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Texas had requested a withdrawal three weeks prior and faced ongoing issues with ID verification despite being told it was accepted. At that time, the casino claimed it couldn't verify the player's Bitcoin address due to the date of the withdrawal, causing further delays. There was also an issue with the maximum cashout of the bonus. After our intervention, the casino acknowledged a discrepancy in the bonus terms and agreed to review the payout situation. Ultimately, the player received $283 in Bitcoin, resolving the issue to her satisfaction.

The player from Massachusetts had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks before submitting this complaint. The payment hadn’t been processed yet. We informed the player about typical withdrawal times and advised patience. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal had been received. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Ohio requested a $200 withdrawal on May 31st and had completed the verification process. Customer service repeatedly informed her that the issue was being escalated, but it took 48 business hours each time, causing ongoing delays. The player confirmed on June 13th that the withdrawal was approved and supposed to be sent to her bitcoin account, but she had not received it. After further communication, the player reported on June 27th that the money was received. We marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from Florida had requested a withdrawal of $875 on the 15th, but it had not been reviewed or approved after two weeks. The player had won $1300 minus the coupon amount. After several follow-ups, the casino confirmed the payment was sent to a third-party provider, citing a 3-10 business day window for disbursal. Despite delays, the player reported receiving the payment eventually. The complaint was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Kansas had complained about a withdrawal delay from an online casino. Despite having provided all necessary documents and followed up via email and live chat, the casino had failed to resolve the issue and had requested further documentation. We had intervened and kept the complaint open until the player confirmed that the casino had agreed to wire his withdrawal. However, the casino then extended the waiting period for the payment approval. After further intervention from our side, the casino agreed to convert the player's withdrawal to Bitcoin for a one-time transaction. The player had confirmed the successful resolution and thanked us for our assistance.

The player from California had reported that he had requested a withdrawal two months prior, which was approved, but he had not received his funds. The casino had ceased communication. He had reached out to our Complaints Team for assistance. After our team's intervention and communication with the casino, the player confirmed that he had received his payment from Raging Bull Slots Casino. Consequently, the issue had been marked as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from the US had faced an issue with verifying a virtual card required for her winnings withdrawal at Raging Bull Slots Casino. The Complaints Team had engaged with the casino and the player to better understand the issue. The casino had suggested the player to provide access to the digital wallet where the transaction of cards could be traced or alternatively screenshots with card numbers from the same wallet. Upon receiving this advice, the player had confirmed that her issue was resolved and requested for the complaint to be closed.

The player from Nebraska had experienced delays in receiving seven different withdrawals via wire transfer from Raging Bull Slots Casino. Despite two approvals, none of the funds had been received, with waiting times surpassing the previously mentioned frames. The player had feared these delays could lead to an indefinite waiting period. The Complaints Team had intervened, communicating with both the player and the casino, and the issue was gradually resolved. The player had received all the withdrawals from his original complaint. However, he was waiting for additional withdrawals from new winnings at that time. The player had expressed his appreciation for the assistance provided by the Complaints Team and Raging Bull Slots Casino.

The player from the Netherlands had experienced a delay in her withdrawal due to 'missing documents'. Despite having sent the documents multiple times, her withdrawal had remained pending for over six weeks. After a series of exchanges with the casino and the complaints team, it was discovered that the casino had not received her proof of address and a valid method of payout. The player then sent these details again, and the casino confirmed receipt. The player had since received most of her winnings but reported a portion still missing. Despite this, she opted to close the complaint due to fatigue over the process. The issue was considered resolved as the player had confirmed receipt of most of her funds.

An Arizona player requested a withdrawal six weeks ago that was approved but not received. The VIP support and department claims to have been notified, and all documentation is reported to be accurate and submitted. The player requests assistance with the prolonged delay. The complaint was resolved as the player finally received his payout from the casino.

The player from Louisiana had requested a withdrawal from an online casino and had experienced delays and a lack of communication from the casino. Despite the casino eventually having approved the withdrawal after the player's complaint, the funds were not received immediately. Our team had reached out to the player for updates, but the player did not respond, which led us to initially reject the complaint. However, upon reopening the complaint at the player's request, it was confirmed that the funds had been received. The issue was subsequently marked as resolved.

The player from the US had been waiting for three weeks for her withdrawal to be approved, despite the casino's Terms and Conditions having promised a 7-10 day timeframe. This issue remained unresolved despite multiple escalations. The player had confirmed that her withdrawal was approved but she had not yet received her payout. After our team's intervention and communication with the casino's representative, the player finally received her withdrawal. The complaint was then marked as resolved.

The player from the United States had reported an issue of not having received her approved Bitcoin withdrawal even after a month. Despite her consistent follow-ups, the withdrawal had remained pending. After her complaint was lodged, the casino resolved the issue and sent the pending Bitcoin withdrawal. The player had confirmed the receipt of her withdrawal, and the complaint was subsequently marked as 'resolved' by us.

This player from Indiana had experienced a delayed withdrawal of $600 that had been made on November 25th after three $20 deposits. The player had not made any withdrawals from the casino before and had deposited and withdrawn in Bitcoin. After 20 business days of waiting and no approval of the withdrawal, the player had contacted us. We had engaged with the casino representative who confirmed all was in place for the payment to be released. The player later confirmed receipt of the withdrawal. The issue had been successfully resolved.

The player from Ohio had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The player had previously made successful withdrawals and all her documents had been verified. The casino had approved her withdrawal but the funds were not deposited. After a series of communications, the casino requested the player's Bitcoin address to process the payment. The player had expressed dissatisfaction over the delay, comparing it to faster services in other casinos. After an extension of the resolution period, the player confirmed that she had received her withdrawal. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Kentucky had experienced technical difficulties while registering on the inclave platform, specifically when she was entering her birthdate. The player had been entering her birthdate in the month/day/year format instead of the required day/month/year format. After she changed the format, the player was able to successfully register her account. The Complaints Team has since marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from the United States had experienced issues with depositing because a card, not owned by the player, had been associated with their account. She had requested to remove the card to allow for continued play and withdrawal capabilities. After some back and forth with the casino's representative, it had been confirmed that the card had been used for a deposit. However, the player had insisted she did not own the card and nobody else had access to her account. Eventually, the casino had agreed to remove and block the card from the player's account as a courtesy, resolving the issue. The player had been satisfied with the outcome and expressed her gratitude.

The player from Texas made a withdrawal request three weeks ago. The casino has failed to respond via email and only communicates through chat with promises of an escalated case. However, it's been 20 days without further action. Finally, after the situation was reviewed from the casino's representative, the player received his winnings.

The player from the United States is facing issues with receiving his payout. Additionally, he is now unable to log in to the site. Despite our attempts to contact the casino, it didn't react to the complaint therefore the case was closed as unresolved. However, the player informed us the other day that the winnings had been received and the issue solved, therefore we changed the status of the complaint to the "solved" one.

The player from the US is experiencing delays when requesting withdrawals from the casino. After our intervention, we were able to help the player to get their winnings. The player confirmed they received the funds. The Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from the United States has requested a withdrawal more than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from the United States has requested a withdrawal almost three weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Oregon has been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hasn’t been received yet. The casino has sent the payment to the crypto wallet the player has provided and there is nothing that can be done from our side as this issue is beyond our control. We advised the player to contact the payment provider directly. The player later let us know the withdrawal had been successfully received, so we consider this complaint to be resolved.

The player's balance was capped for an unknown reason. We asked the casino for more information. While waiting for a reply, the player informed us that the casino had contacted her and that her balance had been restored. Consequently, the complaint was closed as 'resolved'.

The player from the United States has requested a withdrawal three weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. The player has confirmed receipt of the payment.

The player from the United States has requested a withdrawal one month prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. The player has confirmed receipt of the payment.

The player from the United States has requested a withdrawal two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from US is dissatisfied with the withdrawal process. The casino responded and stated that the player's withdrawal had been approved and that they should receive it soon. Shortly after, the payment was received and the issue was resolved.

The player struggled to withdraw as his requests were getting rejected. After several complications and not receiving emails from the casino representative, the player decided to withdraw his funds via crypto wallet. The player confirmed that he received the payment about 2 months after filing the complaint. The complaint is resolved.

The player's withdrawal is delayed for unknown reason. The casino responded to the complaint and soon after the player's payments began to be processed. The player received all of their payments and the issue was resolved.

The player from United States had been waiting for their withdrawal to be processed for over a month before submitting the complaint. Within a month afterwards, the player's withdrawal was processed and their winnings were successfully received. The complaint was closed as 'Resolved'.

The player's withdrawal is delayed for over 2 months. Although the player received only a part of his outstanding balance, we assumed it was because of a sticky bonus, which is very likely given the nature of the casino. Since the player is not responding any more, we are considering this complaint as resolved.

The player from US is experiencing issues with a withdrawal due to unfinished verification. After the casino were able to confirm the details with the player, the withdrawal was successful and the complaint is resolved.