Gxmble Casino Review

The Player from the United Kingdom had won £3,000 but the casino had rejected their three withdrawal attempts of £1,000 each and confiscated the winnings. The player had claimed that there were no restrictions or warnings about the games they played while using a bonus. We had asked the player for more details and had invited the casino to provide their version of events. However, despite our efforts, the casino did not respond to our request for information. As a result, we had to close the complaint as 'unresolved', which negatively impacted the casino's rating. Based on the statement from the casino provided by the player, we consider the casino's decision against our Fair Gambling Codex.

The player from the Netherlands, who had deposited over 30,000 euros at the casino, reported an unresolved withdrawal of 2,000 euros and the closure of her account. The player claimed that she had had her account verified since August 2023 and hadn't used any bonus, only her own money. The Complaints Team tried to mediate the situation by inviting the casino representative to join the conversation and provide a detailed explanation. However, despite multiple attempts to contact the casino, there was no response. Consequently, the complaint was closed as 'unresolved', negatively affecting the casino's rating.

The player from the United Kingdom had used a bonus deposit on gxmble.com and won 680,000 Euros. However, the casino had confiscated his winnings and refunded the original 320 Euro deposit, citing a violation of terms and conditions which limited betting to 2 Euros when a bonus was in effect. Upon review, we had found that the maximum bet limit when playing with a bonus was an industry standard, and therefore, we did not penalize the casino. Despite the player's dissatisfaction, the complaint had been rejected due to the player's breach of the stated terms and conditions.

The player complained that despite verifying his account twice, his withdrawal requests had been delayed due to 'high volume of withdraws'. In the end, he woke up to a banned account, allegedly due to suspicious activities on the played games. No more updates since then.

The player complained about the casino ignoring him and not returning his deposit. He said he'd requested account closure due to gambling issues, which the casino did, however, they wouldn't return the payment he'd made before and said there was no deposit. The casino didn't react to this complaint and there were no more updates since then.

The player from the United Kingdom had reported an issue with incorrect bet marking and account closure at an online casino, following a negative review. He had been unable to withdraw his €500 winnings. After our team's intervention, the casino had reopened the player's account and he had successfully initiated a withdrawal. We had advised the player that the withdrawal process could take up to 14 days. The complaint was left unresolved due to the player's lack of response to our follow-up messages.

The player from Hungary suspects the casino of providing a fake version of the "Gates of Olympus" game from Pragmatic Play. The player claims there are game-play discrepancies and missing features compared to the original. The complaint was rejected as the player's balance was zero at the time of account closure.

The player from Germany has requested a withdrawal that is not being processed. He has constantly been given different excuses such as issues with the bank or the payment provider being busy. The player later informed us that he received the winnings, so we were able to close the complaint.

The player's requesting a refund of his deposits as he claims that he was not supposed to be playing in the casino. The complaint was rejected as the player was allowed to play in the casino according to their terms and conditions.

The player from the United Kingdom had experienced withdrawal issues with Palm Casino. Despite her successful verification, her repeated withdrawal attempts had been declined due to various reasons, such as an incorrect IBM number and initials in the withdrawal section. Additionally, she had been blocked from accessing the site. After she submitted her complaint, the casino had offered to return her deposits, which she had received and confirmed. The player had been satisfied with this resolution and did not wish to pursue an investigation into potential withheld winnings. Consequently, we had marked the complaint as 'resolved'.