Kats Casino Review

The player from Nevada had requested a crypto withdrawal on 6/28/24 after depositing and receiving a bonus. Despite document approval and repeated follow-ups, the withdrawal was delayed. The issue was resolved when the casino confirmed that the payout had been completed successfully, and the player received $660. The player noted confusion regarding deductions from her winnings, which were explained as standard adjustments for bonus withdrawals. The complaint was marked as 'resolved' in the system.

The player from the US had requested a withdrawal one month ago, but the casino did not provide updates or communicate about the withdrawal timeline. The player was also refused information due to their status as a non-depositor. The accepted withdrawal of $100 (reduced to $70 due to fees) remained unprocessed due to apparent delays. The issue was resolved after repeated follow-ups and resubmission of payout details, with the player confirming his funds had arrived. We facilitated communication between the player and the casino, ensuring all required documentation was submitted and the withdrawal was processed.

The player from Virginia had requested a withdrawal totaling $8,100 over three months prior. Despite multiple attempts to contact the casino through chats, emails, and phone calls, the player kept receiving delayed responses and was unable to reach their account managers. After extensive communication, the player settled for a payout offer of $3,000 within 15 days and the remaining balance of $5,100 to be paid in installments, while forfeiting an additional $7,356.27. The complaint was marked as resolved, and the player confirmed acceptance of the terms despite expressing dissatisfaction with the handling of her case.

The player from Alabama had requested a withdrawal three weeks prior on 5/24/2024 but had not received any updates or been contacted. Attempts to reach customer service had resulted in responses indicating that the host was unavailable. The casino confirmed that the withdrawal was completed and shared the payment hash with the player. However, the player did not respond to confirm receipt. The complaint was rejected due to the lack of response from the player.

The player from the United States had requested a $100 withdrawal three weeks prior after winning the amount from a bonus. Despite providing the necessary details and being told it would be deposited within 7 to 10 business days, he had not received the funds and had heard nothing from the casino after repeated follow-ups. The casino claimed to have communication issues with the player and promised the withdrawal would be completed within 5-7 business days. The player expressed frustration over repeated delays and lack of updates. The complaint was ultimately rejected by us due to the player's lack of response to further inquiries.

The player from South Carolina had requested a withdrawal two weeks ago but had not received the reduced amount of $244 after fees. The casino had initially confirmed the amount but had yet to send the funds. We had requested additional information and communication between the player and the casino. The player had reported that her account was fully verified and the withdrawal had been pending since May 21st. After further communication, the player informed us that she had resolved the issue herself. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Virginia had been waiting for two months for his withdrawal request of $420.32 to be processed. Although he had repeatedly reached out to customer support and had been charged a processing fee, the payout remained pending. The casino eventually processed his withdrawal, but he received only $240.26 after deductions. The player raised concerns about being charged twice for the processing fee. After further investigation and communication, it was discovered that the extra charge was not related to the casino but coincided with a charge from Coinbase, which was later refunded. The issue was successfully resolved, and the player confirmed receipt of his funds.

The player from the US had encountered a prolonged delay in her withdrawal request from Kats Casino, despite having submitted all necessary verification forms. The casino had repeatedly asked for more time to process the withdrawal, causing frustration for the player. Upon intervention by the Complaints Team, the casino had cited technical issues with their third-party payout processor as the cause of the delay. They had assured the player that the payout would be processed within a week. After some skepticism and a request to waive a processing fee from the player, the casino had confirmed the successful transfer of funds. The player had subsequently confirmed receipt of her winnings, resolving the issue.

The player from Wisconsin had achieved a win from welcome bonus free spins but had not received a payout even after three months. Despite having fulfilled the casino's verification requirements, his winnings remained 'pending'. We had requested further information from the player to better understand the situation, but received no response. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Missouri had had an issue with Kats Casino regarding a withdrawal of her winnings. She had deposited $30 on a bonus and had won $500. However, when she had attempted to withdraw, only $210 was approved. Despite having provided all requested documents for verification and having made multiple attempts to contact the casino, she had received no response. Her account had also been blocked, preventing her from logging in. The casino had later informed her that they were experiencing technical issues with their third-party payout processor. After a prolonged period of communication, the casino had finally transferred the funds to the player's selected payout mode. The player had confirmed receipt of her winnings and had thanked the Complaints Team for their assistance. The issue was then marked as 'resolved'.

A player from New Jersey had been waiting for a withdrawal of $2,130 for two months. Despite the casino's claim of a 5-7 day Bitcoin payout, this was not the case. The casino attributed the delay to issues with a third-party payment company and promised to expedite the process. A partial payment of $580 was received, but the remaining amount was still pending. Due to the player's lack of response, the complaint was closed as unresolved.

The player from the United States had requested a withdrawal 3 weeks prior. After adhering to the playthrough requirements, his withdrawal had been approved, however, he was still awaiting a payout. Since then, communication with the casino had ceased. The player had confirmed he had passed the KYC verification and had not made any deposits. The casino representative had assured that the withdrawal team was working on transferring the funds. Despite the player's frustration due to the delay, the casino had confirmed that the withdrawal would be completed within 5-7 business days. However, the complaint was rejected as unresolved because the player had ceased to respond to further inquiries.

The player from Utah had used a no deposit bonus, won a significant amount, and had fulfilled the playthrough requirements. However, his withdrawal was declined due to a claim that he had wagered bonus money on a restricted game, which he disputed, stating that he hadn't been allowed access to restricted games. The Complaints Team had attempted to mediate the situation by asking the casino to clarify their bonus terms and conditions and to reconsider their decision. However, the casino insisted on their initial stance, stating that the player had violated the bonus terms by playing Keno before requesting a withdrawal. Despite further attempts by the Complaints Team to resolve the issue, the casino ceased responding, resulting in the complaint being marked as 'unresolved'.

The player from the United States had been waiting for two weeks for the approved withdrawal and it had not yet been received. The player was new to the casino and had completed all necessary KYC verifications. The casino had assured that they were working on the withdrawal and that the funds would be transferred. The casino later stated that the funds had been transferred and an email with the payment hash had been sent to the player. However, the player stopped responding to our messages and we were forced to reject the case due to the lack of cooperation.

The player from Washington had a disputed withdrawal issue with Kats Casino. Despite meeting all the playthrough requirements and following the terms and conditions, the casino denied their withdrawal requests twice without explanation. After contacting customer support, they were informed there were multiple accounts under their name, which the player disputed. The Complaints Team engaged in extended communication with both the player and the casino. The casino eventually confirmed the closure of the player's accounts, including the primary one, after multiple requests. The complaint was ultimately closed without confirmation of the player receiving their funds.

The player from Arkansas completed a bonus requirement and won $1700. However, after a month, the winnings still had not been paid out. Requests to speak with a supervisor were unsuccessful, with only the VIP representative allowed to discuss withdrawal. The player's account was verified, and the casino confirmed a partial payment of $400. The casino claimed the player breached their max cash-out rule, which led to a lower payout. Later, the casino updated us about the paid-out amount. Despite our efforts to get a confirmation from the player, there was no reply. As a result, the complaint was marked as 'rejected'.

The player from Iowa had trouble cashing out his winnings after repeated attempts to send documents. Despite numerous calls and emails, he had been told to wait for the banking department for over a month. Upon receiving his complaint, we asked for details on the documents he had provided for KYC verification. The player confirmed that he had sent all necessary documents including proof of address, ID, debit card, a selfie with ID, and a bitcoin address. We requested the presence of a casino representative to clarify the situation. The casino claimed that the player had been paid on February 22nd. However, the player did not respond to our messages to confirm or refute this claim, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Illinois had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout had not been received yet. The player reported receiving only partial payments totaling $1,540 out of the $3,040 approved withdrawal, with delays and a lack of updates from the casino. Despite multiple follow-ups, the casino attributed the delay to issues with a third-party payment processor. Due to insufficient responses and prolonged delays, we closed the complaint as unresolved, negatively impacting the casino's rating.

The player from Texas had faced issues with Kats Casino due to an address change. Despite having provided the necessary documents for identification and address verification, the casino had refused to update his address or process his withdrawal unless the account balance was zeroed out. We had asked the player for more details and evidence to support his claim, but he failed to respond to our queries. Consequently, we could not investigate the issue further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the US had submitted two withdrawals, one for $1,500 and another for $2,500. The casino had only paid $500 and had not responded to contact attempts for nine months. The player had provided all the necessary information and screenshots to the Complaints Team. The casino had responded, stating that they had not received the payout mode from the player to transfer the funds. After the player had submitted the required documents and preferred payout mode, the casino did not confirm the completion of the transaction. Without any confirmation from the player, they had to reject the complaint. The player's frustration with the casino's handling of the situation and repeated requests for information were noted, but ultimately, the complaint was marked as unresolved due to insufficient evidence and the casino's claims regarding the cancellation of the withdrawal request.

The player from the US had experienced a delayed $3,000 withdrawal due to alleged site maintenance. Despite being assured by the casino that his withdrawal was being processed, the player had not received any response from the banking team at that time. After the player had provided additional information and screenshots, we had reached out to the casino for clarification. While initially the casino didn't respond, the player later confirmed that the issue had been resolved and the withdrawal had been processed. We then marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from the United States had requested a withdrawal over two weeks ago. Despite having successfully completed the KYC process and confirming the payout method, the player had not received his money nor any responses to several emails he had sent to the banking department. After he submitted a complaint, the player provided further details about his communication with the casino. We had involved a casino representative in the conversation to clarify the situation. However, the player informed us that he had received his payment, resolving his issue. We then marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Minnesota had deposited $30 and won $800. However, the casino had changed the withdrawal to $210 alleging coupon use, even though it had been confirmed that no coupon was used. Payment of $800 had been promised, but after lengthy investigations and delays, no money had been received. We had attempted to resolve the issue by asking the player for more details and extending the deadline for response. However, due to the player's lack of response, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Oklahoma had requested a withdrawal of $525 a month ago. Despite having provided all the necessary documentation and communicated with the casino through chat and email, she had received no response. Her account had been verified and she had accumulated her winnings using both real money and a bonus. Despite our attempts to facilitate communication between the player and Kats Casino, the casino had failed to respond. As the casino was operating without a valid license and didn't refer to any ADR service, there was no gaming authority to turn to. We had marked the complaint as 'unresolved', which might have negatively affected the casino's rating.

The player from Oregon faced withdrawal issues after winning over $2000 using a promo code for 100 free spins from the casino. The casino had claimed the player was ineligible for withdrawal due to the activation of consecutive free bonuses, which was against the casino's terms and conditions. The player had expressed frustration and dissatisfaction with the casino's decision. We confirmed that the casino had acted in compliance with its terms and conditions, and therefore, we were unable to assist the player further. The complaint was subsequently rejected.

A player from Delaware has encountered several issues with Kats Casino, including changes in rules during gameplay and suspicions of fraudulent activities. He's made several deposits totalling $600, and is currently waiting on a $230 withdrawal, despite having sent verification documents three times. The complaint was closed as the player played away her balance.

The player from California played a bonus and won $100 which the casino refused to pay. The player has also deposited multiple times at the casino. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from the United States deposited $100 whilst using a bonus code and later requested a withdrawal of $2,840. The casino denied the withdrawal due to what they claim as "mixed-up funds" after canceling the withdrawal.

The player from Utah had her winnings from a no-deposit bonus confiscated, due to redeeming multiple consecutive bonuses. The player stated that a customer service representative of the casino called her and told her to play down her balance in order to be given another free chip. The casino provided a recording of the call which seemed to disprove the player's statements. The player was asked for further information, but as they stopped responding the complaint was rejected.

The player from the United States is facing an issue where his spin on the Bubble Bubble 2 slot is not being recorded in history. Despite the $2.00 deduction, there is no record of the spin. Since the player did not have any supporting evidence of the incident, we had to reject the complaint.

The player from the US claims that the wagering contribution counter is not working properly. The player later completed the wagering requirements and successfully withdrew his winnings, therefore we closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from the United States has been accused of breaching bonus T&Cs and her winnings have been confiscated. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the United States had her Free Chip winnings cancelled altogether with a minimum deposit that has been placed to verify the payment method. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the United States had his bonus winnings capped. The casino also blocked the player's account. We tried to contact the casino but there was no response, so the complaint was closed as 'unresolved'

The player from Japan has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The complaint was closed because the player submitted 2 complaints about the same issue.

The player from Japan has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.