Flappy Casino Review

The player from Latvia had registered and deposited 1,100 EUR at Flappy Casino, but his account had been blocked within 24 hours without any explanation. The casino support had not responded to his inquiries. The player insisted that he had followed all the rules and wanted his deposit back. He had played mostly slots and live casino games without using any bonuses. He reported that when he had tried to register, he received a message that the user was blocked, but he was still allowed to play. The casino stated that the player's account had been closed without any outstanding balance or pending withdrawals and that they were unable to refund the already played down deposits. The player's request for his account information in accordance with GDPR had not been addressed. We concluded that the casino had the right to close a player's account at any time without any reason, and since the player had played down all of his deposits, there was no money to be refunded. The complaint was rejected.

A player from Portugal had a problem with Flappy Casino because they didn't credit his second deposit of 50 Euros to his account. Even though the bank confirmed the transaction, the Casino's customer support redirected him to speak with his bank rather than addressing the issue. We advised the player to get in touch with his payment provider for a detailed investigation, as the casino couldn't intervene in this process. We extended the complaint's timer by 7 days for the player's response. However, the player didn't respond within the set time frame, which led us to reject the complaint due to lack of further information.

The player from Portugal had won a prize from the online casino but had encountered issues during withdrawal due to an incorrect bank account number. She had claimed to have always used the correct account details, and had suggested that the casino might have altered the number. The casino, however, had closed her account, leading to a loss of her winnings. The Complaints Team had requested additional information from the player and had reached out to the casino to understand the situation better. The casino had clarified that withdrawal details were manually entered by players and that the player had failed to verify the account number used for the withdrawal requests. Despite the player's insistence that she had never used an incorrect account number, the Complaints Team had concluded that they could not assist further without the necessary verification documents from the player. The complaint was therefore rejected.

The player from Bavaria had reported a delay of over 16 days in receiving his withdrawal from an online casino. The casino had insisted that the transaction was processed correctly on their end. The player later received his funds. We marked the issue as 'resolved'

The player from Italy, who had self-excluded from a sister casino, had created an account at Flappy Casino and deposited after passing the KYC verification. However, his account was later blocked without him having informed the casino about his self-exclusion. The player had used the same personal data for registration as in the previous account, and his KYC documents had been approved quickly. He had faced issues with customer support, who had closed the chat on him without providing a resolution. He had also complained about the casino's use of incorrect merchant codes for credit card transactions. Despite his self-exclusion, the player had continued to receive promotional emails from the casino. We had investigated the matter, but due to the terms of the Antillephone license and the lack of explicit self-exclusion across all brands in the initial email from Rollino, we were unable to assist the player further. The complaint was closed and the player was advised to use our Self-Exclusion Assistance Tool and seek professional help for his gambling problem.

The player from Finland had reported an issue with her deposited funds not appearing in her casino account, even after she had provided a receipt. The casino had been unable to resolve the issue after a week. We had advised her to contact her payment provider and to refrain from making additional deposits until the issue was resolved. However, the player did not respond to our messages and questions, which led to the inability to further investigate the issue. Therefore, the complaint was rejected.

The Swedish player had completed verification for initial withdrawals, but the fourth withdrawal request for 500€ was still pending after two days. They were having issues contacting the casino as emails were being ignored and live-chat was unavailable. We had advised the player that withdrawals could take up to 14 days to process and to contact us if the money was not received after this period. We extended the complaint resolution timer by 7 days, but due to a lack of response from the player, we were unable to proceed with the investigation or provide a solution.

The player from Sweden had had issues with Flappy Casino, where he had been unable to close his account and had continued to gamble, leading to significant losses. Despite having won 20,000€, he had been forced to play due to a withdrawal limit. He had managed to win an additional 2,663€, but the casino had refused to pay out, claiming he had duplicate accounts. The player had demanded his winnings or a refund of his losses. We had attempted to assist the player by asking for evidence of his request for self-exclusion, but the player had not responded to our queries. As a result, we had been unable to proceed with the investigation or provide potential solutions, leading to the rejection of the case.

The player from Denmark, who acknowledged his gambling addiction, was surprisingly able to make a deposit to Flappy Casino despite having a gambling block activated on his payment method. Upon review, he discovered that the casino had used a payment provider with false payment information to bypass restrictions. He had contacted the casino, but they denied any wrongdoing. The player's main concern was not about self-exclusion but about Flappy Casino using misleading payment provider information to bypass checks, like his Revolut gambling block. The player had reached out to the casino about this issue, but his refund claim was rejected. The Complaints Team had advised the player to reach out to the Licensing Authority to report this issue. Despite the player's account being closed following his email to the casino, the Complaints Team could not take further action regarding the misleading payment information. The complaint had been rejected due to the limitations in resolving the specific issue raised by the player.

The player from Germany had trouble completing the verification process with the online casino, which hindered his withdrawal attempts. The Complaints Team identified that the issue lay in providing proof of ownership for his Revolut card. They suggested the player provide screenshots from his Revolut account to prove ownership. However, due to the player's lack of response to the team's messages and questions, the complaint could not be further investigated and was consequently rejected.