The player from New Zealand had won a jackpot and later found her account had been suspended. She had been unable to access her winnings of over $40,000 and had received no clear explanation from the casino, with her account being under review. She later discovered that she had apparently requested self-exclusion, which had caused the account review and a six-month wait period. However, she disputed having made such a request. We had suggested she contact the casino's official Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), ECOGRA, due to the casino's uncooperative stance. The player had then reported her account had been reopened, but only half her winnings were received. We had extended the complaint handling period, awaiting the casino's full payment. However, due to the player's lack of response, we had to reject the complaint.
The player from New Zealand had won a jackpot and later found her account had been suspended. She had been unable to access her winnings of over $40,000 and had received no clear explanation from the casino, with her account being under review. She later discovered that she had apparently requested self-exclusion, which had caused the account review and a six-month wait period. However, she disputed having made such a request. We had suggested she contact the casino's official Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), ECOGRA, due to the casino's uncooperative stance. The player had then reported her account had been reopened, but only half her winnings were received. We had extended the complaint handling period, awaiting the casino's full payment. However, due to the player's lack of response, we had to reject the complaint.
Automatic translation: