Ritzo Casino - Pelaajan voitot on takavarikoitu.

I am filing this complaint against Ritzo Casino for the unjustified confiscation of €93,374.28 in winnings.

​I deposited and played with REAL MONEY. I did not have any active bonus during my gameplay. After a successful session, my total balance reached €95,374.28.

​Upon requesting a withdrawal and completing the KYC process (all my documents were approved), the casino informed me via email that they had confiscated the majority of my funds, leaving only €3,500 in my account.

​The casino justifies this action by citing a clause in their Terms and Conditions stating that players who have made 5 or fewer deposits have a "maximum withdrawal limit" of €3,500 for their entire account history.

​I believe this clause is predatory and extremely unfair for the following reasons:

​The winnings were generated from pure real money without any bonus advantage.

​A "Max Win/Withdrawal" cap on real money deposits is considered an "unfair rule" by industry standards and mediation portals.

​I was allowed to deposit and play without any warning about such a restrictive cap on potential winnings.

​I have used the remaining €2,000 left on the account, but I want to clarify that this DOES NOT constitute an acceptance of the confiscation. I am demanding the full restoration of my legitimate winnings.

​I have screenshots of the balance before the confiscation, the email from the casino support, and the confirmation of my approved KYC.

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.

Hello,

Thank you very much for submitting this complaint. I'm sorry to hear about the problem you're experiencing. Please allow me to ask you a few questions to clarify your situation.

• What types of games did you play to accumulate your winnings?
• Have you received any withdrawals from this casino before?
• Could you please forward me the email you received from the casino after your winnings were deducted, along with all the subsequent communication betwen you and customer support at veronika.f@casino.guru?

I hope we will be able to help you resolve this issue as soon as possible. Thank you in advance for your reply.

Best regards

Veronika

Hi Veronika, I only played the slots; and yes, they let me withdraw 500 euros. I have sent everything in my possession to the email address provided above. Thank you for your availability. I look forward to hearing from you.

Hello Battista,

We would like to update you that due to Veronika, your designated resolver, being on vacation, we have opted to extend the timeline by an additional 7 days. Since Veronika has an in-depth understanding of your situation and maintains direct communication with the casino, we find this extension justified. Your patience is sincerely appreciated, and I assure you that Veronika will contact you at the earliest opportunity.

Thank you for your understanding and ongoing patience.

Best regards, Casino Guru

Dear Battista

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, Michal (michal.k@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.

Kind regards,

Veronika

Hello Battista,

I'm Michal, and I have taken over this complaint. I have reviewed this case, and I will continue the dialogue with the casino to gain further insight into this issue and to explore how I might be able to assist.

We would also like to invite Ritzo Casino to participate in this discussion.

Dear Ritzo Casino,

While we acknowledge that rule 9.2. The maximum withdrawal amount is €3,500 for players who have made five or fewer deposits, regardless of their use of the welcome bonus. is indeed publicly listed in your terms and conditions, and players agree with your T&Cs when they register their accounts; however, applying such a rule does not align with the standards of fairness and transparency that players and we as well rightfully expect from reputable gaming establishments.

We are aware that in certain jurisdictions, the win limits can be mandated by local laws or regulations. We would like to see them gone, but we understand that casinos need to follow regulations; however, to the best of our knowledge, no such regulation is mandated for Curaçao-licensed casinos.

If the casino's voluntary (i.e. not required by law) win limit is very high (€500,000, for example), we still don't approve of it, but we are able to tolerate it in most cases (depending on the specifics of the limit), as long as it doesn't apply to progressive jackpot wins. However, this doesn't seem to be the case here, as the maximum withdrawal amount of €3,500 for players who have made five or fewer deposits does not seem to be fair. Such a rule is nowhere to be found in top casinos.

As we mentioned in our Fair Gambling Codex.

With this in mind, we would like to respectfully request a reevaluation of this matter, as we feel that the player deserves to receive their full winnings, particularly since these appear to have been earned through genuine monetary play without any bonuses involved.

If there are any other factors relevant to this case that cannot be shared publicly, please feel free to forward them directly to me at michal.k@casino.guru for an independent review.

Hi Michael, thank you for taking charge of my complaint. I would just like to clarify a few points:

The maximum withdrawal amount is €3,500 for players who have made five or fewer deposits".

​Any professional gambler and legal expert knows that a WITHDRAWAL LIMIT (how much you can cash out per month/transaction) is NOT a WINNINGS CAP (a limit on how much you can win). By zeroing my balance, Ritzo is breaching its own Terms & Conditions and illegally seizing my funds.

​I have played fairly, my account is verified, and I used real money. This is an unacceptable and predatory practice.

Best Regards

Battista Falconi

We would like to ask the casino to reply to this complaint. We are extending the timer by 7 days. If the casino fails to respond in the set time frame, we will close the complaint as ‘unresolved’ which may negatively affect its rating.

Dear Battista,

I regret to inform you that I have not yet received a response from the casino through our usual communication channels. I plan to make another attempt using an alternative method to reach out.

As our goal is always to clarify and address the matter rather than leave it unresolved, I will extend the timeframe by an additional 7 days. I remain hopeful that we will see some progress soon.

Dear Michael, thank you very much. I must admit I'm losing hope a bit. I’m still waiting, but I have less confidence that Rizzo is actually interested in my case. I also wrote to them myself, but unfortunately, I haven't received any further response. I am very disappointed with their behavior. Let’s hope for the best. Thanks again, best regards

Dear Gologarp98,

I have tried to contact the casino repeatedly but have had no success. I’m afraid there is not much that can be achieved without cooperation from their side. I will mark the complaint as "unresolved" in our system. I understand this isn't a satisfactory solution to your issue. However, the decrease in the rating caused by unresolved complaints might help to change the casino's approach. If the casino decides to react, we will reopen the complaint, and you will be notified by email. In the meantime, if you wish to pursue your case further you can contact the Curaçao Gaming Authority (CGA) and submit a complaint to them via email at complaints@cga.cw.

Although CGA currently does not handle individual disputes between players and gaming operators, they may review the situation for potential violations of law, so it might be worth a try.

You might find our article How to submit a complaint to a regulator | Casino Guru useful. Please let me know how they respond at michal.k@casino.guru if you decide to pursue this option. Regrettably, this is where any potential assistance from our end concerning your case concludes.

While we cannot assist further with this specific case, please do not hesitate to contact us if you have issues with any other casino in the future, and we will try our best to help if possible.

Best regards,

Michal

Casino Guru

We’ve reopened this complaint at the request of Ritzo Casino. We would like to allow this case one more chance to be resolved and help both parties involved to reach a satisfactory conclusion.

Dear Michal,

Thank you for being so patient. We have thoroughly reviewed this complaint and wish to provide our formal position.

We respectfully but firmly contest the characterisation of our actions as unjustified or predatory, and we wish to address each point raised.

THE RULE IS LAWFUL AND NOT PROHIBITED

There is no provision under Curaçao law, nor under the Curaçao Gaming Authority’s published guidelines, that prohibits operators from setting withdrawal limits for new accounts. The CGA’s own Policy Guideline on Terms and Conditions (November 2025, Section 15) requires only that such rules be "clear and transparent" — it sets no minimum threshold, nor does it ban the practice. The rule applied in this case fully satisfies that standard.

Casino Guru’s own assessment that such a rule is "not found in top casinos" reflects a market observation, not a legal or regulatory standard. Uncommon does not mean unlawful.

THE RULE WAS CLEARLY STATED IN OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Rule 9.2 of our Terms and Conditions explicitly states: the maximum withdrawal amount is €3,500 for players who have made five or fewer deposits, regardless of their use of the welcome bonus. This clause was:

∙ Publicly available on our website at all times;

∙ Accessible within one click from the homepage and registration page, in full compliance with CGA accessibility requirements (Section 3 of the Policy Guideline);

∙ Actively acknowledged by the player upon registration, in line with Section 4 of the CGA Policy Guideline, which requires active acceptance, not passive acknowledgement.

The player’s acceptance of our Terms and Conditions at registration constitutes a binding contractual agreement under Curaçao law, which governs all interactions per Section 6.4 of the CGA guidelines.

THE RULE IS NOT A "WINNINGS CAP" — IT IS A WITHDRAWAL LIMIT

We note the player’s argument that a withdrawal limit differs from a winnings cap. We acknowledge this distinction in principle. However, our T&Cs are explicit that the €3,500 figure constitutes the maximum withdrawal amount for accounts within this deposit threshold. The rule is applied consistently and transparently, and its practical effect was clearly disclosed before the player chose to deposit and play.

KYC AND PRIOR WITHDRAWAL WERE PROCESSED CORRECTLY

The player’s KYC was approved, and an initial withdrawal of €500 was processed — demonstrating that our procedures functioned correctly and in good faith. The remaining balance was handled strictly in accordance with the published Terms and Conditions.

RISK MANAGEMENT RATIONALE

This rule serves a legitimate risk management purpose for new accounts with limited deposit history. It is a proportionate measure to protect the integrity of our platform, and its application is consistent across all players who fall within this account category — there is no selective or discriminatory enforcement.

CONCLUSION

We have acted in full compliance with our published Terms and Conditions, which are lawful, transparent, and were explicitly accepted by the player. We are not aware of any regulatory provision that has been breached. We remain open to dialogue through this channel, but respectfully maintain that the funds were handled correctly and in accordance with the agreement in place.

We appreciate Casino Guru’s role in the industry and remain committed to fair and transparent operations.

Kind regards,

Ritzo Casino Representative

Formal rebuttal to Ritzo Casino’s position

​Dear Michal and the Casino Guru Team,

​I am writing to formally respond to the statement provided by the Ritzo Casino representative regarding my complaint, specifically concerning my gaming activity in February 2026.

​1. Misapplication of Withdrawal Limits vs. Win Caps

The casino explicitly states in their response: "We acknowledge this distinction in principle." However, in practice, they have completely ignored it. If Rule 9.2 were strictly a "withdrawal limit," any funds exceeding the threshold should remain in my balance to be withdrawn in subsequent installments. By confiscating the remaining funds, the casino has effectively applied a Win Cap (Maximum Win Limit). This is widely considered a predatory practice within the industry when applied to "Real Money" deposits (funds not tied to a bonus).

​2. Invalidity of "Risk Management" for Legitimate Winnings

The casino justifies its actions as a "legitimacy of risk management." However, risk management should focus on preventing fraud, money laundering, or bonus abuse—not on limiting the casino's financial liability toward a player who won fairly. Having successfully passed the KYC process in February 2026, my conduct has been verified as legitimate. Confiscating fair winnings from real money deposits is not "proportionate"; it is an unfair enrichment of the operator at the player's expense.

​3. Contested Compliance with CGA Guidelines

The casino refers to the CGA Policy Guidelines from November 2025 (Section 15), stating that rules must be "clear and transparent."

​Lack of Substantive Clarity: A rule that allows a casino to seize thousands of euros won honestly with a player's own money cannot be deemed "clear" if it is disguised as a mere administrative withdrawal limit.

​Unfair Terms: Simply because a rule is written in the Terms & Conditions does not make it equitable. Even under Curaçao jurisdiction, clauses that create a significant imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties are subject to challenge under fair gaming standards.

​4. Request for Full Restoration of Funds

Since my gameplay occurred in February 2026, in full compliance with all deposit and verification procedures, there is no ethical or commercial basis—other than a forced interpretation of an unfair clause—to withhold my balance.

​Conclusion

I kindly ask Casino Guru to keep this complaint open and to evaluate Ritzo Casino’s conduct accordingly. A rule that caps profits derived from real-money deposits is a significant barrier to consumer trust in the iGaming industry. I remain open to a fair resolution but insist on the restoration of my legitimate winnings.

​Best regards,

​Battista Falconi

Dear Ritzo Casino Representative,

Thank you for your thorough response.

While the rule in question may indeed be included in your Terms and Conditions from a strictly technical standpoint, its presence alone does not necessarily make it fair. In fact, as I have pointed out in our Fair Gambling Codex, the enforcement of such a rule contradicts the principles of fairness and transparency that players, as well as we, rightfully expect from esteemed gaming establishments.

With this in mind, we kindly and respectfully ask you to reconsider your position and work with us toward a fair resolution, in line with the expectations associated with reputable, highly rated casinos.

If you choose to uphold your original decision, we will respect that; however, this case will be classified as Unresolved - Against Fair Gambling, which will adversely impact your casino's safety index rating and simultaneously act as a public alert regarding your practices.

I look forward to your timely response, and I remain hopeful that a mutually acceptable resolution can be reached.

Thank you for the reply, Michal!

We will get back to you shortly.

Dear Ritzo Casino Representative,

I look forward to your prompt response and remain hopeful that we can reach a mutually satisfactory resolution.

Dear Michal,

We have carefully reviewed the relevant sections of Casino Guru’s Fair Gambling Codex in detail and would like to respond thoughtfully and in the spirit of constructive professional dialogue.

 1. OUR RULE IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE CODEX EXAMPLES

Our Rule 9.2 is fundamentally different in nature. It applies exclusively to new accounts with five or fewer deposits. It is a structured risk management measure for early-stage accounts, where the casino has had limited opportunity to assess the player’s profile, transaction history, and behaviour. Once a player moves beyond this initial threshold, the rule no longer applies. This is not a blanket, indefinite cap on winnings; it is a transparent, scoped condition tied specifically to account maturity.

The Codex examples describe permanent restrictions applied to all players without limitation. Our rule is temporary by design, clearly defined, and directly tied to the account’s stage of development. This is a meaningful and material distinction.

 2. OUR PLATFORM ALREADY MEETS THE CODEX WITHDRAWAL LIMIT STANDARD

This point is particularly important. Casino Guru’s Fair Gambling Codex states in its section on Withdrawal Limits that the recommended minimum is €10,000 per month - and notes that withdrawal limits are accepted "as part of the online gambling ecosystem."

We want to draw your attention to the fact that Ritzo Casino’s published monthly withdrawal limit is €10,000 - precisely in line with Casino Guru’s own recommended standard. This limit is clearly published on our website and applies to all players, including the current case.

Rule 9.2 is a separate and additional condition applicable only to new accounts in their earliest stage. It exists alongside, not instead of, our standard withdrawal framework. Any player is fully subject to the standard €10,000 monthly withdrawal limit - the exact figure the Codex recommends.

With this in mind, we respectfully suggest that our overall framework is broadly consistent with the standards the Codex promotes.

 3. THE CODEX IS AN EDITORIAL STANDARD, NOT A REGULATORY REQUIREMENT

We note that throughout the Fair Gambling Codex, Casino Guru consistently uses language such as "we believe", "we recommend", "in our opinion", and "we would like to see". This reflects Casino Guru’s editorial position and aspirational guidance - which we respect, but it does not constitute a binding legal or regulatory obligation.

Ritzo Casino’s binding obligations are defined by Curaçao law and our CGA license conditions. No provision of either prohibits Rule 9.2. We have not been presented with any evidence to the contrary, and we would welcome the citation of any specific law or binding regulatory rule that our terms violate.

 4. FULL TRANSPARENCY AND INFORMED PLAYER CONSENT

Ritzo Casino operates under a valid Curaçao Gaming Authority license and in full compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements. Rule 9.2 was:

 • Published in plain, unambiguous language

 • Accessible on our website prior to registration, within one click from the homepage

 • Actively acknowledged and accepted by the player at account creation - before any deposit was made

 • Applied consistently and exactly as written

The Fair Gambling Codex itself places significant emphasis on transparency and informed consent. We have met both standards fully. The player had every opportunity to review the Terms and Conditions before choosing to register and deposit.

 5. A FAIR CLASSIFICATION SHOULD REFLECT THE FACTS

We are not an operator that hides rules, applies them selectively, or introduces conditions after the fact. We are a licensed, regulated operator that publishes its rules clearly and applies them consistently and equally to all players.

We would respectfully suggest that the classification "Against Fair Gambling" should be reserved for operators who act deceptively, apply hidden rules, or violate their own published terms, not for operators who apply clearly disclosed, lawfully published conditions that a player has explicitly and actively agreed to.

We value our relationship with Casino Guru and the important role your platform plays in the industry.

We simply ask that the full context of this case - the scoped and temporary nature of Rule 9.2, our platform’s compliance with the Codex’s own €10,000 withdrawal standard, our full regulatory compliance, and the player’s informed consent - be given fair and complete consideration before any final classification is made.

We remain available for further dialogue and look forward to your response.

Kind regards,

Ritzo Casino Representative

Dear Ritzo Casino Representative,

Thank you for providing additional clarification regarding your position. Unfortunately, it appears that it may still not align with our fair gambling standards and the equitable practices generally expected within the industry.

Nonetheless, I have sent you an email containing a proposal from the player. This proposal aims to explore potential solutions to address this matter in a somewhat reasonable way, and I am awaiting your response.

We would like to ask the casino to reply to this complaint. We are extending the timer by 7 days. If the casino fails to respond in the set time frame, we will close the complaint as ‘unresolved’ which may negatively affect its rating.