Lucky Legends Casino Review

The player from the United States had experienced problems with the withdrawal process at an online casino. Despite having verified her account and submitted a withdrawal request, she was informed that the process would exceed the initially stated 5-day period. The player sought the return of her initial $100 deposit or the payout of her winnings. The Complaints Team had advised her to wait at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before lodging a complaint, as delays could be due to unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. However, due to the player's lack of response to further inquiries, the complaint could not be investigated further and was subsequently rejected.

The player from Illinois is experiencing a withdrawal delay at Lucky Legends casino. Despite winning before and successfully withdrawing a jackpot, the player is struggling to cash out a recent win of $500 despite fulfilling all terms and conditions.

The player, located in United States, had his casino account closed with no reason provided after winning $2000. Despite reaching out multiple times via email, he received only automated responses and seeks explanation.

The player from Denmark is experiencing communication issues with the casino which has stopped replying to emails and blocked chat functionality. Despite approval, a payout to his Coinbase account has been delayed.

The player from Mississippi had her winnings, totaling $886.50, disappear without notification or explanation. Despite submitting verification details and making a necessary crypto deposit, no money has appeared in her account or crypto wallet.

The player from Washington had attempted to make a withdrawal after fulfilling wagering requirements but was asked for an additional deposit for wallet verification and identity check. Her withdrawal requests had been immediately cancelled and the casino had asked for banking details despite her not using them for withdrawal. The required deposit for "verification" had not been returned either. After the intervention of the complaints team, the casino had reviewed the situation and approved the withdrawal. The player had confirmed receiving her cashout, however, she had expressed dissatisfaction with the casino's service. The issue had been marked as 'resolved' by the complaints team.

The player from Texas had initiated a withdrawal that was approved more than 10 business days prior, but the funds had not arrived. The player had reached out to the casino's support for assistance but had not received a response. After the player filed a complaint, the casino had proceeded with the payment. The issue had been successfully resolved with the player confirming receipt of their winnings. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

A player from Vermont requested a withdrawal of $1500 from Lucky Legends Casino 8 days ago. Despite submitting all required documents and sending an email, the player has not received a response or their winnings.

The player from California had been waiting for a withdrawal approval since January 29. The withdrawal got approved on February 29, but he hadn't received the funds by March 11. The player's account had been verified and he had used a no rules bonus. After the complaint was forwarded to the casino, they confirmed that the payment had been issued and delivered via Bitcoin. The player acknowledged the receipt of his funds, albeit with a fee. The issue was then marked as 'resolved' by our team.

The player from New York unable to provide required utility bill for verification as no bills are under her name, which resulted in the blocking of her withdrawal. Meanwhile, the casino continues to send her promotional messages without closing her account.

The player from the US had completed the KYC verification process and initiated a withdrawal request. However, the casino had not processed the withdrawal within the specified 7-10 business days. The player was forced to switch withdrawal methods from wire transfer to Bitcoin due to his bank's policies. After several delays and assurances from the casino, his withdrawal was finally approved, but the payment was still pending. We had attempted to assist the player and extended the timeline of the complaint, but due to the player's lack of response, we were forced to reject the complaint. The player could reopen the complaint if he wished to resume communication.

The player from the United States had issues with the withdrawal process due to a lost card. Despite successfully going through the verification process with another card and contacting customer service, he had not been able to withdraw his funds. We had explained the importance of the KYC process and asked for further communication between him and the casino for investigation. However, the player did not respond to our messages and questions within the extended time frame. Consequently, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Ohio was struggling with a withdrawal request due to multiple verification needs. This had been the fourth time he attempted to finalize his withdrawal, but kept facing demands for additional verification. We reached out to him for further details about the ongoing verification process, the status of his documents, and his last communication with the casino. However, due to his lack of response, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from South Africa had deposited $30 at Lucky Legend Casino, expecting to receive a $200 free bonus. However, he was unable to claim the bonus as the casino claimed he had already used it previously. The player had requested either the bonus or a return of his deposit. We had explained that casinos reserved the right to restrict or withdraw bonuses at any time, often without notice. The player had compared the situation to a store not honoring a discount coupon, but we clarified that casinos often distributed promo codes in bulk, sometimes through third parties, without verifying player eligibility. Regrettably, we couldn't resolve the player's issue and had to reject his complaint.

The player from Oregon had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, her payout hadn't been received yet. Despite the casino's claim of processing the payment via Bitcoin, the player had not confirmed receipt of the funds. The Complaints Team had attempted to facilitate communication between the player and the casino, however, due to the lack of response from the player, the complaint was eventually rejected. The player had the option to reopen the complaint in the future.

The player from South Carolina had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, his payout hadn’t been received at that point. He had expressed frustration with the delay, expecting the process to be faster. However, after four days, he confirmed that his withdrawal had been successfully paid. We had therefore marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Texas had attempted to withdraw $2,500 from her $10,000 winnings at Lucky Legends. Despite having provided all requested documents and her bank having approved the international wire transfer, her withdrawal was delayed. The casino had suggested the player use Bitcoin for withdrawal, as their third-party payment providers could only transfer to certain banks. The player had expressed frustration about the withdrawal process and the casino's customer service. In the end, the player had decided to cancel her withdrawal and played out her balance. Consequently, the complaint was dismissed as there was no longer a balance to be withdrawn.

The player from Ireland had experienced some issues with an online casino. She had an old account with a verified address and had recently resumed playing. However, she had moved and was trying to change her address on her account. The casino had requested bank statements as proof of address, then later declined to accept them. Furthermore, she had an approved withdrawal, but the casino was asking for proof of payment. She had attempted to log into her account but was unable to do so. The casino had claimed that her deposit was rejected by her bank and therefore, her account was deactivated. Despite her attempts to provide proof of deposit, the casino and the complaints team had not been able to confirm the deposit, resulting in an unresolved issue. The complaint was closed as "rejected".

The player from Ohio had requested four withdrawals of $2500 each from the casino two weeks prior. Despite having been verified twice and having been informed by support that everything was in order, she had not received her money. The player had provided detailed correspondence with the casino, outlining the inconsistencies in their responses regarding the payment methods. Upon intervention by the Complaints Team, the casino had been invited to clarify the situation. The player later confirmed that she had received the first payout and the issue had been resolved. The casino also confirmed that all payouts were working correctly. Despite extending the timer for any additional issues, the player did not confirm if the complaint could be considered resolved, leading to the closure of the complaint as Rejected

The player from Texas is facing issues when trying to withdraw a substantial win. Use of certain payment methods has been denied by the casino for various reasons and they now request a bank statement for a newly set up Wells Fargo account, causing further delay.

The player from Texas is experiencing difficulties with a withdrawal request of $2100. Despite multiple emails sent and one complaint filed on trustpilot, he has not received his prize. The complaint was resolved as the player successfully received the money from the casino.

The player from Missouri had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks before contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The player's account had been verified and she had successfully withdrawn from the casino before. Despite the withdrawal being approved, the player hadn't received her $100 winnings. After our intervention and communication with the casino, the casino confirmed that the payment had been delivered via Bitcoin. The complaint was kept open for the player's confirmation, but the player did not respond within the given time frame. As a result, the complaint was rejected. A few weeks later we received an email from the player, in which she informed us about receiving the withdrawal therefore the status of the complaint was changed to "resolved".

The player from North Carolina had had an issue with a delayed withdrawal from an online casino. After she had submitted the complaint, the Complaints Team had advised her that it was normal for withdrawals to take a couple of days or weeks to process and suggested waiting at least 14 days before filing a complaint. The player later confirmed that she had received her withdrawal, and the issue had been marked as resolved.

The player from Washington had been waiting for a withdrawal, even after meeting all bonus playthrough requirements. We reached out to him for additional information and extended the response time by 7 days. However, the player did not respond to our messages and questions, thus hindering further investigation. As a result, we had to reject the complaint due to lack of cooperation from the player's side.

The player from Colorado had requested a withdrawal from an online casino but did not receive her money even after two weeks, which led her to file a complaint. The player claimed that she had submitted the necessary documents multiple times, but the casino kept asking for them again. The casino had responded, stating that the quality of the documents she submitted was poor and incomplete. After the player resubmitted the documents, the casino confirmed that everything was in order for the withdrawal. The casino then stated that the payout would be processed soon. However, the player did not confirm receipt of the payment, which led to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from the United States had requested a withdrawal a month ago. Despite the request having been approved on 11/8, the payout had still not been received. After the player confirmed that the transaction was authorized and approved for withdrawal, we had transferred the complaint to another team member for further assistance. The casino had been invited to provide their side of the situation. The casino claimed that the withdrawal request was for $500 and additional funds had been re-deposited into the player's account due to lack of approved payout method. They also mentioned that two recent withdrawal requests for $250 and $300 were still within the timeframe per their terms and conditions. However, the player had failed to respond to our messages and questions, leading us to reject the complaint.

The player from the US had requested a withdrawal amount of $1,800.00. The initial request through wire transfer couldn't be processed. Although she had complied with all requests and even attempted to change to a check withdrawal method, the casino hadn’t processed the withdrawal. The casino had stated that their 3rd party payment providers were unable to process payment to the bank in question. The player was advised to open a Bitcoin account, which she did, and requested the withdrawal again. After providing her Bitcoin address and waiting for some time, she finally received the funds. The complaint was resolved with the assistance of the complaints team.

A player from South Carolina is facing issues with Lucky Legends casino regarding a Bitcoin withdrawal. He received a lesser payment without any confirmation from the casino, and despite evidence showing the transaction, the casino denies initiating this payment. The player wants to receive his remaining $15. The complaint was resolved as the player received his money from the casino.

This player from Ohio had experienced withdrawal issues with a casino after requesting a $950 payout. His withdrawal was denied with the reason allegedly being his Bitcoin address. Despite being told by support that his documents were in order, he hadn't received a payout. After we had invited the casino representative to the conversation, they confirmed that the payout was made on November 24th via Bitcoin and marked as delivered. The player later confirmed receipt of his withdrawal, leading us to mark this complaint as resolved.

The player from Connecticut had reported an inability to sign into his casino account and a lack of response from customer support. He had a withdrawal amount of $165. After we investigated, we found that the player's account had been deactivated due to multiple payment reversals, which was a breach of the casino's terms and conditions. The casino had provided evidence to support this claim. As a result, we concluded that the complaint had been unjustified and we rejected it.

The player from the United States had requested a withdrawal after meeting the Playthrough requirements, but her request had been declined and the funds were returned to her balance. The casino support had insisted that she had only completed part of the required Playthrough, which had led to confusion. Despite this, the player had been adamant that she had correctly completed the Playthrough. Eventually, the player's withdrawal had been processed, albeit with an $18 fee, which she had found frustrating. The issue had been resolved when the payment was received, leading us to mark the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from the United States experienced a delay in withdrawal after winning $190.00 and fulfilling the requested information. Despite having contacted the online casino multiple times and providing all documentation, the casino then requested the player's banking statements. The casino claimed that their 3rd party payment providers were unable to collect any of the player's deposits, which was why they were unable to process the winnings. We had asked the player to provide bank statements to prove that the deposits had cleared their bank. The player had not responded to our request, and therefore, we were unable to investigate the issue further.

The player from South Africa had requested a withdrawal and was asked by the casino to open a Bitcoin wallet and provide additional documents. The casino later refused the payout because the player had claimed multiple bonuses consecutively. We had sought clarification from the player to better understand the situation and asked for relevant communication between the player and the casino. However, the player had not responded to our queries within the extended 7-day period, which led us to reject the complaint due to lack of information.

The player from the United States successfully became a VIP member in LuckyLegends Casino and submitted a withdrawal request for $590 via Bitcoin. However, despite being previously verified, the player was asked to resubmit ID documents during the withdrawal process. The approval process took around a month, she is still waiting for the bitcoin to appear in her wallet. We contacted the casino representative, and they confirmed the payout was processed. Later, the player shared the news that the payment was received, so we closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from South Africa had experienced a withdrawal delay after his first successful withdrawal request. Despite having passed the KYC verification and accumulated his winnings through a "No deposit bonus", his winnings were not received within the stated 7-10 business days. However, after communicating with the casino's VIP Manager, he confirmed receipt of his winnings. We had subsequently marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from California had requested a withdrawal of their winnings three weeks ago. Despite having provided all requested documentation, the withdrawal had not been processed. We had reached out to the player for additional information to better understand the situation and had extended the response time by 7 days. However, the player did not respond to our queries. As a result, we could not proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from South Africa had requested a withdrawal a month ago but had not received her funds. Upon investigation, we found that the player had not made a minimum qualifying deposit which was required for the payment method verification. We had asked the player to make the necessary deposit and notify us about the progress. However, the player had failed to respond to our messages and update us on her actions, leading to the rejection of the complaint due to lack of cooperation.

The player from California had requested a withdrawal from an online casino three weeks prior. Despite the withdrawal having been approved, the casino had delayed the payout date and had not released the funds. The player had confirmed that she passed all necessary verifications. The Complaints Team had invited a casino representative to participate in the complaint. Despite having received confirmation from the casino that the payout was processed, the player did not confirm receipt of her winnings. As a result, we had to reject the complaint due to lack of confirmation from the player.

An Arizona player had been experiencing issues with withdrawing her winnings from an online casino since August 30th, 2023. Despite having submitted her banking information multiple times, the casino had claimed not to have received it. The player's account had been verified and a $100 bonus was retrieved by the casino, but her withdrawal requests were consistently rejected. After extensive communication between the player, the casino, and the complaints team, the casino finally acknowledged receipt of all necessary documents. The player had been informed that her funds would be disbursed via a bank wire payment within 3-10 business days. The player confirmed the receipt of $544 out of the $600 she had attempted to withdraw, marking the resolution of her complaint.

The player from California had requested a withdrawal from an online casino but didn't receive her money even after two weeks. She was frustrated with the drawn-out verification process and felt the casino had provided misleading information. The Complaints Team had advised her to be patient and cooperate with the casino. Despite her dissatisfaction with the casino's customer service and withdrawal process, the player confirmed that she had eventually received her withdrawal. The issue was then marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from Missouri had encountered issues with delayed withdrawal of her approved $2500 from Lucky Legends Casino. Despite the casino's policy that permitted only $2500 to be withdrawn at a time, the player had claimed to have lost $30,000. The complaint was initially rejected due to the player's lack of response. However, it was later reopened and subsequently closed after the player had confirmed receipt of her payout from the casino.

The player from the US was frustrated over the delayed withdrawal of their winnings. Additionally, they expressed discontent with the customer service they received, alleging harassment and taunting from casino support agents. The player demanded their winnings be paid and threatened legal action if not. We found that the player's winnings were accumulated from a free bonus, which according to the casino's terms and conditions, limited the maximum withdrawal to $100. The player's account was closed due to a violation of these terms. Despite the player's allegations of fraud and threats of legal action, we concluded that the complaint was unjustified based on the evidence provided.

The player from Texas, after being fully verified, utilised a casino bonus and won over $4000. However, their $2500 withdrawal request via BTC was rejected and winnings were confiscated.It came to light that the player had used mulitple free bonuses in a row, and so was in breach of the casino's terms and conditions. Consequently, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Pennsylvania had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The player had expressed confusion over the casino's rules and mentioned an issue with multiple free bonuses. The casino had approved her withdrawal after she made a deposit as requested. However, the player had reported that her approved documents were not showing up in the system, which caused her to feel unsure about the casino's reliability. Despite our efforts to assist her, the player did not respond to our requests for further information. Therefore, we were unable to investigate the matter further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Missouri is struggling with a delayed withdrawal of $246.05 via Bitcoin. Despite meeting all wagering requirements, the processing time has taken two weeks, and they have yet to gain access to their funds due to network fees and block chain issues. The player has reached out to the casino, Coinbase, and a professional for help. The complaint was resolved as the player's withdrawal arrived.

The player from Oregon had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting the complaint. The payment hadn't been processed yet. Despite the casino having verified her account and confirmed that all necessary documents were received, the player's withdrawal was denied, forcing her to restart the process. The player had provided a transaction list as proof of her legitimate winnings. We had extended the timer for her response by 7 days but received no further communication from her. Consequently, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from California had had an issue with withdrawing his winnings from a VIP bonus at an online casino. Despite the casino's assurances that his account verification had been completed, his withdrawal request, made on August 15th, had not been processed. After communicating with the casino's support team, his withdrawal had finally been approved. The player had been informed it would take 3-4 weeks to receive his winnings. He later confirmed that he had received his payment. The Complaints Team had marked the case as resolved upon receiving this confirmation.

The player from Arizona was facing withdrawal issues. After completing all bonus requirements and verification processes, the casino claimed there were multiple accounts associated with their info. Later, the casino provided us with sufficient evidence to support its claims and decision. The complaint was closed as unjustified because the user registered and used at least 3 other accounts in the casino and claimed multiple no-deposit bonuses prior to accumulating winnings on the disputed account. In addition, the no-deposit bonuses were already used earlier and consecutively without making deposits between them, which breached another rule related to no-deposit bonuses. The casino acted correctly and in accordance with its terms and conditions, and we accept its decision. The player is not entitled to the disputed winnings obtained in this way.

The player from Florida has had difficulty withdrawing their winnings of $400. Despite sending numerous identification documents over a 2-week period, the casino requests new documents every day and their withdrawal remains unprocessed. We rejected the complaint because the player stopped responding.

The player from the United States is experiencing delays in a requested wire transfer withdrawal from the casino. Despite being told it could take a month, it's still processing. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Alabama is facing a payment delay. He requested a withdrawal two weeks ago, but it has not been processed yet. The casino policy states a timeframe of 1-7 business days to approve and receive the payout, but this timeframe has already been exceeded. Even without the player's confirmation, we closed the complaint as resolved since the casino confirmed a successful transaction via crypto.

The player from Tennessee has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Their money hasn’t been received yet. We got in touch with the casino representative, and they informed us that the payment had been processed. The player confirmed receiving the money a few days later, so the complaint was closed as resolved.

The player from California created an account in Lucky Legends Casino, won a bonus, and was asked to verify their identity for withdrawal. Citing past experiences with identity theft, the player declined, after which their account was closed without clear explanation.

The player from Arizona made a withdrawal request on June 27th and was still waiting for it to be processed. We contacted the casino to get more information about the reasons of the delay, however the player informed us that the issue got resolved and they received the payment, therefore we closed the complaint as a resolved one.

The player from California has two withdrawal requests, one of which was paid out, while the other for $1000 is still pending. The casino claims that they are too busy to process the withdrawal. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Netherlands has requested account closure, but the casino continues to keep the account active and send bonus offers via email. We closed the complaint because the player stopped responding.

The player from Germany submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the United States made a deposit and won $2,400 using a no-wagering, no-max cashout bonus. The casino rejected the player's request for a $2,000 withdrawal, citing table gameplay with the remaining funds after the withdrawal was requested. Although the casino was able to pay out a part of the disputed winnings, we concluded that the complainant is entitled to the full disputed winnings with a possible deduction of a returned initial deposit and a deposit bonus that she spent after the casino decided to deny her pending withdrawal and "reset" her balance. We could have not agreed with the way of a solution provided by the casino, while the $1,000 of her disputed winnings were deducted from her winnings unreasonably. This amount was left in the complaint as a remaining disputed amount until the casino reconsiders its decision. Therefore, we were forced to close it as unresolved.

The player from the US cannot withdraw her winnings. The casino accused her of redeeming multiple free chips consecutively. We were forced to close this complaint because the casino acted in compliance with the bonus terms.

The player from United States had her winnings cancelled due to a rule forbidding a redemption of multiple consecutive Free Bonuses. We ended up rejecting the complaint because the casino provided evidence supporting its claims.

The player from the United States had her winnings cancelled to a rule forbidding a redemption of multiple consecutive Free Bonuses. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the United States has requested a withdrawal. Unfortunately, the payment seems to be delayed. The casino representative had informed us that payments were processed, but this was not confirmed by the player, so, therefore, the complaint has been rejected.

The player's winnings were confiscated as she was not supposed to get a bonus. Later, in the given circumstances, the casino reconsidered its decision and returned the confiscated funds to the player. Although the returned amount was divided between the used payment method and the player's casino account balance, and the player, unfortunately, lost it by playing, the casino fulfilled its part of the agreement. The complaint is resolved.