RakeBit Casino - general discussion (page 6)

Hello, thank you for the update. Could you also review whether your reopen request meets all updates made on the forum?

That's very important, and we will see what comes next.

Hello Radka, thank you. I have reviewed my reopen request against the updates on the forum. The corrected figures in my forum post are the same as the figures in my reopen request and documents: one deposit of 10,000 USDT, five withdrawals totalling 44,502 USDT, and a last balance screenshot of 129,743.12 USDT. I sent the supporting documents to the Complaints Team on 12 and 16 October, and I do not claim anything I cannot document. My reopen request was denied on 19 October as a "cold case". I respectfully ask the team to reconsider that decision: the casino's last written position is dated 12 May 2026, it has still not named a second account or user, and the new documents are ones the casino cannot easily dispute (its own Terms text, its public "VPN-friendly" statement, and the written reply of the Central Bank of the Comoros of 16 October 2026 on its licence). Could you tell me whether I should submit a new reopen request, or whether the Complaints Team can reconsider the existing one? Thank you for your help.

Hello, Samuel. I'm sorry to hear the request was denied. I was a bit afraid of the outcome since the matter is older. You are welcome to send a new reopen request again, but to me, it seems you put it all in the last one already and it did not work anyway. It's really not about the last response from the casino but about when the problem occurred. At least, in my opinion, that remains the same and most related.

I think it's crucial to distinguish that the reopening was very likely rejected because it was considered a cold case, not due to irrelevant information or updates provided. Unless you have some different explanation in your email, I frankly cannot help with the matter.

Hello Radka, thank you for your honest answer and for your time. I understand that the reopening was refused because of the age of the case, not because of the information provided, so I will not send another reopening request.

I have one separate question. If Casino Guru's review of Rakebit lists its Anjouan licence, could the team that maintains the casino reviews and the Safety Index look at this point? On 16 October 2026 the Central Bank of the Comoros confirmed to me in writing that the Anjouan bodies issuing such licences are not recognised and that the licence has no legal standing in the Comoros. I can send the message to whichever address you tell me.

Hello Samuel, I greatly appreciate your understanding, though I'm sorry we could not help.

The question you asked—I'm not entirely sure whether this is the same logic as whether the license is actually active or not. What we focus on is whether the casino is licensed and the AOFA license is an actual gambling license, B2B or B2C. Background as follows: "Anjouan is one of 3 major islands that make up the Union of Comoros. Previously, the Anjouan Offshore Finance Authority (AOFA) was responsible for all gambling licensing operations for the autonomous island jurisdiction. This changed in June of 2023, when all online licensing duties were made the responsibility of Anjouan Licensing Services - better known as Anjouan Gaming."

It may mean that this license does not allow its owner to provide gambling services in Comoros; interestingly, it is or at least was, pretty much the same as licensed Curacao casinos.

In any case, I read the warning you mentioned and in my opinion, it addresses bank-related services, not directly illegal issuing of gambling licenses:

"The Central Bank of the Comoros also draws the public's attention to the following fictitious structures, which claim to issue licenses for banks and financial institutions in the Union of the Comoros."

or

"The Central Bank of the Comoros reiterates that the licensing of banks and financial institutions operating in the Comoros falls under its exclusive jurisdiction and that any other structure besides the aforementioned entities is illegal and subject to prosecution in accordance with the laws and regulations in force in the Union of the Comoros."

My colleagues are aware of this; the warning is from a previous date. Also, based on this information, I'm not sure the bank will assist you with your complaint to the licensing body.

Thank you, Radka, I appreciate the explanation. To be clear, I am not asking the bank to help with a complaint. I asked it a direct question about this licence, and its financial intelligence service answered me in writing on 16 October 2026. That message is different from the December 2025 communique about banks. It says that the Anjouan Offshore Finance Authority, the "Anjouan Gaming Board" and Anjouan Licensing Services are not recognised by the competent Comorian authorities, that they have no legal mandate to issue or supervise online gaming licences, that licences issued by them have no legal validity under Comorian law, and that online gambling is not authorised in the Comoros.

I understand that Casino Guru judges licences by its own criteria and I do not want to argue with that. I only ask that your colleagues read the message itself, which I can send to any address you give me, so that they can decide whether it changes anything.

I thank you. So in other words, the more recent info you have from the Bank of Comoros does not match the general warning placed on the website we talked about. Instead, it addresses the status of the gambling licensing authority. Now I understand. Would you kindly forward this original email to data@casino.guru please? I now agree it looks like something we would not have had much chance to come across. I can sense the difference now.

My colleagues from the Data Team will surely appreciate such insightful information coming from an official source.

Thank you, Radka. I have forwarded the original email from the Central Bank of the Comoros to data@casino.guru. I appreciate you and your colleagues taking the time to look at it.

Yeah, sure, the pleasure is all mine. I can’t speak on behalf of my colleagues, but this information certainly seems worth a closer look. So, once again, thank you for sharing this statement with my colleague.

There’s one thing I can’t quite get my head around, though. I’m still surprised to see the National Bank commenting on a company that issues gambling licences. I understand the part about banking services and banking certificates. That’s certainly something I’d expect the National Bank to address.

However, seeing it state that certain companies aren’t legally recognised as gambling licensing authorities is quite surprising. That’s really intriguing, I must say.