Instant Casino Review

The player from the Netherlands struggled with withdrawing a total of €1935 due to a series of withdrawals and subsequent account blockage. Despite multiple attempts to contact customer service and sending numerous emails, he received no answers and was only informed that his account was closed. The Complaints Team was unable to investigate the issue further due to the lack of response from the player after multiple inquiries, resulting in the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Spain had made a withdrawal of 824 euros two days prior, but had not received the funds. He was unable to get a response to his emails, and the live chat only connected him to an AI without access to real support. The Complaints Team had kept the complaint open for two weeks, advising him to be patient and cooperate with the casino. However, due to a lack of response from the player, the complaint was rejected, and he was informed that he could reopen it at any time.

The player from Latvia had faced issues withdrawing winnings of €400 from Instantcasino. After a prolonged wait, the funds returned to the player's account, and despite passing verification, the account was closed due to a minor error in the registration date of birth. We had attempted to gather additional information from the player to assist in resolving the issue, but due to a lack of response, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Sweden had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting their complaint. Their money had not been received yet. The Complaints Team had extended the inquiry period by an additional 7 days for the player to respond regarding the status of the withdrawal. However, as the player did not respond to the team's messages, the complaint was ultimately rejected due to a lack of further information to investigate the issue.

The player from Germany had successfully completed her first withdrawal but faced issues with the second, as her account was suspended and under review after she submitted a bank statement for verification. It had been over 14 days without a resolution. Ultimately, the issue was resolved, and her winnings were paid out to her.

The player from the United Kingdom had a deposit issue after depositing 1000 Euros, with one transaction accepted and the other declined yet not returned. Despite providing bank statements showing that the funds were successful, the casino denied responsibility, citing the statements as incorrect. The player sought assistance in retrieving his funds and noted poor customer care experiences. The complaint was ultimately rejected due to the player not responding to requests for additional information needed to investigate the issue further.

The player from French Guiana was awaiting a withdrawal made on January 17, 2024. Despite the casino's terms indicating that withdrawals should be processed within 24 hours, he had not received the payment after more than 6 days and remained without a clear response. The issue was resolved after the player confirmed receipt of the payment. We marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system and expressed appreciation for his cooperation.

The player from Quebec requested assistance regarding a withdrawal status that remained unchanged despite the casino's claims that it was in progress. After depositing $600 and winning $1,000, she had not received a response to her emails. The Complaints Team kept the complaint open for additional development but ultimately had to reject it due to a lack of response from the player. The player was informed that she could reopen the complaint at any time.

The player from Germany faced a delayed withdrawal and could not cancel it, while also receiving no response to email inquiries. The Complaints Team extended the inquiry period for an additional 7 days but ultimately could not proceed with the investigation due to the player's lack of response. As a result, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Germany experienced significant delays in withdrawing winnings due to ongoing identity verification requests, despite having submitted official documents. After three days with no resolution and unsatisfactory support responses, she expressed concern about the casino's practices and considered legal action. The casino ultimately agreed to process the outstanding payments. The issue was marked as resolved following this confirmation from the player.

The player from the Netherlands faced issues with InstantCasino.com regarding responsible gambling. Despite submitting multiple requests to lower deposit limits and eventually close the account, the casino failed to respond to these requests, which resulted in a significant loss of funds. The Complaints Team extended the communication period to allow the player to provide necessary documentation related to self-exclusion, but due to a lack of response, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Spain had a problem with a €100 deposit that was deducted from his bank account but not credited to his casino gaming account. The Complaints Team had recommended that he contact his payment provider to investigate the issue, as the casino could not assist further without additional documentation. However, the player did not respond to requests for the necessary information, which led to the rejection of the complaint due to a lack of communication.

The player from the Netherlands faced issues with an open account despite having informed them of his registration with CRUCKS due to gambling problems. The casino did not acknowledge this and left his account open. The Complaints Team clarified that the player had failed to follow the proper procedure for self-exclusion requests, as he had sent them to the wrong email address. Consequently, the complaint was deemed unjustified, and the player was informed that the casino was not obligated to process a refund or closure of the account under those circumstances.

The player from Germany had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout had not been received yet. The Complaints Team had extended the investigation period by seven days; however, due to the player's lack of response to inquiries, the complaint was rejected. The player was informed that the complaint could be reopened at any time.

The player from Germany had deposited approximately 522 euros in Bitcoin at the casino, which had been debited from his account but not credited by the casino. Despite providing evidence of the transaction and confirming with the payment provider that the funds had been received by the casino, communication from the casino had ceased. The Complaints Team had extended the investigation period but ultimately had to reject the complaint due to the player's lack of response to further inquiries.

The player from Portugal expressed dissatisfaction with the casino due to delays in processing two withdrawals of 1500€ and 500€. Despite having a verified account, he faced repeated excuses from customer support regarding high volumes of cash-outs. The issue was resolved after two days, with both withdrawal amounts successfully credited to his account. We acknowledged the player's cooperation and confirmed the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Germany faced a delay in withdrawing funds from the casino, despite its advertisement of 24-hour payout processing. After 36 hours, the casino cited high volume as the issue. The Complaints Team extended the inquiry period to allow for further clarification, but ultimately, the player did not respond to requests for additional information.

The player from British Columbia had been attempting to withdraw €1000 since January 2, 2025, but the funds were returned to her casino account. After a second withdrawal attempt, the casino closed the player's account and had not responded to any communication regarding the issue. The Complaints Team had extended the response time for the player but ultimately had to reject the complaint due to a lack of response from her.

The player from the United Kingdom had two initiated withdrawals of 120.25 and 120.00 that had not been processed, despite the casino's promise of instant withdrawals. Additionally, the player noticed that the withdrawal update feature was removed, and the live chat was unavailable, with no response to their complaint email. The complaint was rejected due to the player's lack of response to the team's inquiries, which prevented further investigation into the issue.

The player from the United Kingdom had his withdrawal declined since December 31st, despite having previously deposited into the same account in November. Contacting support led to vague requests for information without clarity. The issue remained unresolved as the player did not respond to follow-up inquiries from the Complaints Team, resulting in the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Italy had repeatedly requested the closure of her account, but it remained open despite multiple emails sent without a response. The Complaints Team had reviewed the situation but ultimately had to reject the case due to the lack of communication from the player. As a result, no further investigation or solutions were provided at that time. The player was informed that she could reopen the complaint in the future if she chose to resume communication.

The player from Sweden encountered difficulties withdrawing winnings after his account was suddenly closed following a 1000 euro win. In response to support requests for various verification documents, the player expressed concern about the casino's legitimacy due to similar experiences reported by others. The Complaints Team extended the response time and requested additional information from the player to assist in the investigation. However, due to a lack of response from the player, the complaint was ultimately rejected.

The player from Italy encountered an issue with a deposit that had not been credited to his casino account or returned to his wallet after four days. The Complaints Team advised him to contact his payment provider for further investigation, indicating that this process might take approximately one month. Due to a lack of response from the player to follow-up inquiries, the complaint was ultimately rejected.

The player from Germany had successfully registered and deposited funds at the casino but encountered issues withdrawing €69 in winnings due to data linked to a previously closed account. After submitting the required documents, the player experienced a delay of 14 days before receiving confirmation that the refund had been processed. The issue was ultimately resolved, and the player confirmed that the amount had been refunded. The complaint had been marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from the Netherlands had been attempting to withdraw a refund for over five months, with no responses to emails and unhelpful interactions on live chat. After finally being informed that the refund was in process, weeks passed without receiving the funds. The Complaints Team intervened, facilitating communication with the casino and ensuring that the player’s refund request was escalated for resolution. As a result, the player was then in the process of receiving the promised funds.

The player from the United Kingdom had a pending withdrawal for 2 days and made a complaint without receiving any updates. After being informed that the request had been sent to the relevant department, the player experienced circular communication, which led to the live chat closing without further assistance. Ultimately, the player confirmed that all her withdrawals had been processed after multiple complaints and emails, and the issue was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team. It was noted that smaller withdrawal amounts tended to be processed faster than larger ones.

The player from Spain had self-excluded from the casino in August but had previously deposited a significant amount. He also mentioned being overcharged on deposits and opening another account using the same personal information. The player requested a refund for the deposits made during the self-exclusion period. The Complaints Team attempted to contact the casino for clarification but received no response. Consequently, the complaint was marked as 'unresolved,' and the player was advised to contact the Anjouan Gaming Authority for further assistance.

The player from Sweden had not received his withdrawal initiated on 2/12 after completing the requested verification process. Despite having sent the necessary documents, he had not received any communication from the casino regarding his funds. The Complaints Team acknowledged the player's concerns but was unable to assist further due to a lack of response to their inquiries. As a result, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Florida successfully confirmed a crypto deposit, but the funds did not appear in their casino account. The Complaints Team attempted to resolve the issue by contacting the casino for clarification on the deposit status but received no response despite repeated efforts. Consequently, the complaint was marked as 'unresolved' due to the lack of cooperation from the casino. The player was advised to reach out to the Anjouan Gaming Authority for further assistance.

The player from Ontario had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks before contacting us. Winnings had not been obtained up to that day. The issue was resolved as the player confirmed receiving the payment through Interac eTransfer, which took around 30 hours. We marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Greece faced issues withdrawing funds from Instant Casino after making significant deposits. His first withdrawal was voided, and the casino closed his account, citing a previous deposit made with his brother's credit card as the reason for retaining his winnings. The Complaints Team reviewed the case and confirmed that the casino's terms prohibited using third-party payment methods without prior approval. The complaint was closed, and further assistance was not provided.

The player from Germany had requested withdrawals totaling €4,000 from Instant Casino, which were marked as "successfully processed." Despite the casino's policy stating that funds should be transferred within 3-5 business days, he had not received the money as of December 1, 2024. The Complaints Team had extended the investigation period but ultimately had to reject the complaint due to the player's lack of response to follow-up questions.

The player from Australia reported serious issues with Instant Casino, including the unlawful confiscation of €6,000 in winnings after complying with all verification requirements. The casino repeatedly closed the player's account without explanation and provided unresponsive customer support, leading to concerns about potential regulatory violations and unethical practices. The Complaints Team concluded that the casino acted in accordance with its terms and conditions, stating that third-party payment methods were strictly prohibited. As the player did not respond to further inquiries, the complaint was ultimately rejected.

The player from the United Kingdom faced an issue with Instant Casino, which had withheld his withdrawal funds due to excessive and unreasonable verification requirements. Despite providing ample documentation, including a valid passport and a bank statement, the casino insisted on a photo of a lost card, which he could not provide. After further communication, the player successfully completed the KYC process and received confirmation that his withdrawal request had been processed. Ultimately, he received his funds, and the complaint was marked as resolved. The player expressed concerns about the casino's practices and urged others to be cautious.

The player from Spain experienced a delay in receiving a €2000 withdrawal from Instant Casino, despite having received an email notification that the transfer was made. After providing a bank statement as requested, the player was still awaiting a response regarding the situation. Following 12 days of waiting, the player was informed that the withdrawal had been successfully made, but found no funds in his bank account. Eventually, the player confirmed that he had received the money after reinitiating the withdrawal. The complaint was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Germany had not received two withdrawal requests of €800 and €1100 from Instant Casino, which were supposedly processed on November 23rd. Despite sending bank statements to support and contacting the bank, he had not received the funds and was advised to be patient. The issue was resolved as the casino confirmed that the transfers had been rejected by the bank, leading to the €1900 being credited back to his casino balance, which he then successfully withdrew via crypto. The complaint was marked as 'resolved' in the system.

The player from the United Kingdom had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks before contacting us. Winnings had not been obtained up to that day. The player faced difficulties due to a bank account switch, which resulted in the funds being sent to an old account that had been closed. Despite repeated communication attempts with the casino and providing new bank details, the casino had been uncooperative and unable to retrieve the funds. Ultimately, we had to close the complaint as unresolved due to the casino's lack of response, while advising the player to consider contacting the Anjouan Gaming Authority for further assistance.

The player from Greece was unable to verify his account because the casino's system did not accept his submitted documents for proof of residence, including a natural gas bill and a bank e-statement. This issue prevented the player from making a withdrawal. The Complaints Team extended the response time for the player but ultimately had to reject the complaint due to a lack of response and communication from him, which hindered further investigation.

The player from Germany reported that the casino was slow to block players exhibiting gambling addiction, allowing them to continue losing money during the delay. Additionally, the casino was unresponsive to inquiries and complaints. The Complaints Team reviewed the case and concluded that while the casino should have protected players, the player had provided incorrect information to create additional accounts, which allowed him to bypass the system. As a result, the complaint was not pursued further, and the player was advised to use a Self-Exclusion Assistance Tool and seek professional help for gambling issues.

The player from Sweden had won 4000 euros at Goldenpanda Casino but encountered issues with ID verification after the site crashed. Despite depositing 70 euros, she was unable to complete the verification process and received no assistance or timeline for her pending payout. Following her complaint, the issue was resolved, and she received her winnings. The Complaints Team marked the complaint as resolved in their system.

The player from Malaysia had a pending withdrawal of RM 318.18 and had not received any response to their email inquiry regarding the issue. Despite the player’s attempts to resolve the situation, including providing proof of correct information and expressing frustration over repeated delays, the casino had not cooperated effectively. The Complaints Team had tried to contact the casino but had not received a response. Consequently, the complaint was marked as 'unresolved', and the player was advised to reach out to the eAnjouan Gaming Authority for further assistance.

The player from the United Kingdom encountered technical issues while using the casino's website, specifically when purchasing bonuses. After successfully buying a bonus and accumulating over £150 in winnings, the game froze, resulting in lost winnings and bonuses. The issue was later resolved as the game was reinstated, and the player successfully received her withdrawal.

The player from Germany faced a withdrawal issue after her joint account was closed without notice. She had provided the requested documents for her payout of 1000 euros, which was declined. After attempting to resolve the issue, she was logged out of her account and could no longer access her winnings of over 1800 euros. Despite her claims of legitimate account ownership and repeated attempts to communicate with the casino, no resolution was achieved, and the casino failed to respond to her inquiries. The complaint was ultimately closed as unresolved due to the lack of cooperation from the casino, with the player being advised to contact the Anjouan Gaming Authority for further assistance.

The player from the United Kingdom requested the payout of his account balance after a change of heart about closing his account. He had deposited €50 and won between €90-€95 from a bet, but during the bet in question, the casino processed his closure request. He provided new bank details and photo ID for verification but had not received any updates on his account balance. The issue was resolved as the player confirmed that the funds had now been received.

The player from Spain had deposited around 1200 euros but had their account closed when they attempted to withdraw 1500 euros. They did not receive any responses to their emails regarding the situation. The Complaints Team found that the casino's terms and conditions had been breached due to the use of a third-party payment method for deposits. As a result, the casino's decision to confiscate the player's winnings was deemed fair, and the complaint was rejected.

The player from Greece successfully initiated a withdrawal of 800 euros, which was confirmed by email, but had not received the funds despite previous withdrawals being credited immediately. The casino was unresponsive to chat and emails regarding the issue. The complaint was resolved when the player received the funds one day later.

The player from Germany had requested a withdrawal of €2250 on August 8th and received confirmation that the funds were sent on August 10th, but she had not yet received the money. Despite weekly inquiries and providing account statements, customer support only advised her to be patient. After two months, she received a message from the casino stating that the funds had been credited back to her account, allowing her to attempt the withdrawal again. Ultimately, she successfully received her winnings, and the complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from the United Kingdom had self-excluded due to gambling addiction and had their account closed, but was able to open a new account using the same personal details shortly after. Despite making no withdrawals, he requested a full refund of the deposits made on the new account, citing a lack of safeguards against re-registration. He had deposited €585 on the second account and noted that the casino had failed to respond adequately after the account's closure. The issue was closed with the player accepting the casino's response regarding their account management practices, leading to the closure of the complaint.

The player from Germany had requested a withdrawal of €1,600 from Instant Casino, but after more than 10 business days, the funds were still not received. Despite multiple communications with customer support and providing the requested documents, including bank statements, the player faced constant delays and additional demands for evidence. The Complaints Team, after reviewing the situation, concluded that the casino's account blocking was likely due to detected activities requiring further investigation, which limited the ability to evaluate the complaint adequately. As a result, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Sweden requested the deletion of a closed virtual card from the casino but faced refusal due to the requirement of a bank statement from Klarna Bank, which could not be provided for virtual cards. He submitted transaction receipts and card details, but the casino continued to deny his proof of ownership. The issue was resolved when the casino deleted the card according to his wishes, despite initially requiring documentation that was unattainable for virtual cards. The resolution occurred without a clear explanation from the casino.

The player from the United Kingdom had an approved withdrawal of 1000 euros that had not been credited to their bank account. The issue was resolved after the player confirmed that the funds had arrived. The Complaints Team marked the complaint as 'resolved' following the player's confirmation of receipt.

The player from Sweden had created an account at Instantcasino, deposited 300 euros, and won a total of 1700 euros in withdrawals. However, her account was closed without explanation after multiple unsuccessful attempts to process her withdrawals and communicate with support, which she suspected was unresponsive or non-existent. The issue was resolved when the player received her winnings, but she still did not receive an explanation for the account closure or any follow-up communication from the casino. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Italy was unable to upload the verification documents required for a withdrawal, as there was no section available in her gaming account. Despite sending multiple emails and receiving vague responses in chat, there had been no resolution since August 5th, and the player was looking to retrieve her winnings. The issue was resolved after the casino's technical team addressed the problem with the document submission process. However, the player did not respond to follow-up inquiries from the Complaints Team, which led to the rejection of the complaint due to lack of further communication.

The player from the United Kingdom, who had registered with GAMSTOP due to a gambling addiction, reported that InstantCasino had not responded to his emails regarding the issues with his account. Despite having bank blocks in place to prevent gambling transactions, he had continued to deposit and wager over £2000. The Complaints Team extended the timeline for resolution due to the designated resolver's absence but ultimately had to reject the complaint after the player did not respond to further inquiries.

The player from Germany had experienced issues with her first deposit at Instant Casino. Despite having provided screenshots of the bank transaction, the casino did not accept the evidence and requested different proof. After several communications and delays in obtaining a bank statement, the player successfully submitted the required documents. Following this, her payment was processed, and the issue was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Sweden had deposited funds into the casino and initially withdrew 150 euros without any issues. After his account was closed, the casino requested further verification documents, including an ID photo with an IBAN account PDF, which he provided. Despite sending the required documents, the player had not received any response from the casino. The issue was resolved when the casino confirmed that the account had been reopened, and the player was able to make a successful withdrawal, but the player failed to confirm that.

The player from the United Kingdom had deposited €20, completed a one-time wager of €420, and attempted to withdraw. Despite receiving email confirmation of the successful withdrawal, the funds were returned to the playing balance, and the player was asked to wager €420 again. After contesting, the account was closed, and the player was instructed to send bank details for a manual refund. We contacted the casino support, and the player confirmed that the money was finally received. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from the United Kingdom had deposited money despite being registered with Gamstop and having gambling blocks on debit cards because transactions did not appear as gambling merchants. There had been no response to the player's complaint, and the support team claimed they couldn't access the complaints department. Upon review, it was found that the casino had closed the player's account immediately after her request. The player was advised to contact the Licensing Authority Gaming Curaçao for further assistance.

The player from the UK voiced concerns about the eligibility of the casino's license and its connections to another site, Slotmonster, from which she had self-excluded. Despite the self-exclusion, she was still allowed to deposit on the platform. She requested a refund of her deposits, but the casino did not respond. We determined that since she had not informed the casino about her gambling problem before creating the account and her account was already closed, there was no further assistance we could provide. The complaint was therefore rejected.