MyStake Casino Review

The player from Spain had faced an issue with MyStake Casino when his account was blocked after he attempted to withdraw his winnings of 123€. The casino had requested identification documents and proof of his home address for verification. Although the player had provided the required documents, he was unable to verify his address, resulting in the account remaining blocked. The player had claimed to have exceeded the document submission limit as none of his address proofs were validated, and had been waiting for a response for 2 days. Despite our efforts to reach out and extend the timer for a response, we did not receive any further communication from the player. As a result, we were unable to proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from United Kingdom won £4000 at the casino but ran into issues when trying to withdraw £3700. After verification, the withdrawal was pending for three days but was then mysteriously transferred to another account. The casino blamed security issues and bonus hunting for closing the player's account and withholding her winnings. The player claims she was not bonus hunting and requests help to retrieve her money.

The player from Argentina was experiencing difficulties with depositing money into the casino via Mercado Pago, as the credits were not appearing in his account. We advised the player to contact his payment provider for an investigation, which might have taken approximately a month. We also recommended that he refrain from depositing more funds until the issue was resolved. However, the player did not respond to our queries and messages, hence we could not proceed with the investigation. As a result, the complaint was rejected.

The player from the United Kingdom is experiencing a withdrawal delay. After verifying his account two months ago, the casino claims to have processed the withdrawal and sent a receipt but the funds never reached his bank. Despite providing bank statements to prove this, the situation remains unresolved.

The player from the United Kingdom had attempted to withdraw £660 in winnings from an online casino, but only £560 had been successfully withdrawn, and the casino was offering only £100. The player had confirmed that he had accumulated his winnings without any active bonuses while playing virtual sports. Despite the player being fully verified, we were unable to assist with his complaint as it pertained to sports betting, an area outside our jurisdiction. Therefore, the complaint had been rejected.

The player from the UK, who had signed up for Gamstop previously due to a gambling issue, found MyStake.com through an advertisement. Despite Gamstop restrictions, he was able to sign up and lost £3k, which caused him significant emotional distress. He also described the casino's team as being rude and unresponsive. The player argued that the casino had been advertising on 'Not Gamstop', specifically targeting UK-based individuals with gambling issues, which he considered to be illegal and unethical. However, we clarified that we couldn't handle complaints related to advertisements or country-specific legal regulations, and our role was to mediate in player disputes. The player did not provide further information to assist in resolving the dispute, which led us to close the complaint.

The player from Argentina had reported that he had deposited 10,000ARS to the Mystake casino, but the amount was not credited to his account. The casino had claimed that the balance was credited and already spent, but there was no supporting evidence in the transaction history. After the Complaints Team had intervened and asked for more information, the player confirmed that the balance had eventually been deposited. The issue was then marked as 'resolved' by the team.

The player from Argentina deposited 14 thousand pesos into their casino account 5 days ago and the amount hasn't arrived yet, despite being deducted from the bank account. The casino support team responded that they were investigating.

The player from the United Kingdom had mistakenly deposited money without proper context or link and the funds had been lost in the process, however, the casino's support had been unhelpful in resolving the issue. The player had been advised by us to contact their bank to investigate the matter as it was beyond the casino's control. The player did so and also contacted the casino again with evidence of the deposit. The casino had then credited the funds to the player's account. The issue had been successfully resolved and the complaint had been marked as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Argentina had deposited 25,000 using Mercado Pago, which wasn't reflected in his online casino account, despite the amount having been deducted from his bank. Hours after the player had submitted his complaint to us, the deposit was credited to his casino account The issue was then marked as resolved.

The player from the UK had their account at MyStake Casino closed indefinitely without a clear reason. Despite having a balance of over £1,220, they are only allowed to withdraw £200, and £1,020 was deleted from their account.

The player from Italy had tried to verify his account, but encountered issues with constant loading of his data fields for document and residence address. He had also mistakenly entered incorrect address information during registration. However, the issue had been successfully resolved as the casino verified his account and automatically updated his address. The player had confirmed the resolution of his issue.

The player from the United Kingdom claimed that the casino had allowed betting despite his self-exclusion from other casinos under the same group. He was then seeking access to his transaction history. The Complaints Team had asked for additional information to better understand the situation, but the player failed to respond within the given time frame. Therefore, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

An Argentinian player had experienced problems with his account at Mu Stake casino where all the accumulated balance had been emptied. He had been blocked from depositing or playing games and his emails to support had gone unanswered. The player's account had been verified for months, and despite being able to deposit and play games, the money that was absorbed had not been refunded. The casino had justified their actions by stating the player made insistent deposits. However, the player disputed this, stating that a deposit had been made to his account without his knowledge. We attempted to gather more information from the player to further investigate the issue, but the player did not respond to our inquiries. As a result, the complaint had been rejected due to lack of player's cooperation.

The player from Argentina had transferred 12,000 pesos to his account at an online casino, but the funds had not appeared in his account yet. The player had already confirmed the successful transfer with his bank, and had provided proof to the casino. We had advised the player to wait for the transaction to be located, which could have taken up to 1-3 weeks. Eventually, the player confirmed that the funds had been credited to his casino account. We then marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from Italy had experienced difficulties with the verification process at an online casino after using a friend's card for deposits. The casino had requested card verification, but the friend's name was not on the card and the bank statement only showed the account number, not the full card number. Despite all other documents being accepted, the player's account could have been blocked due to this issue. The player was concerned about losing €550. We had explained that using a third-party deposit was forbidden in all online casinos and that any winnings generated from such a deposit would likely be confiscated. We also informed the player that the casino had the right to permanently close their account. The player asked if there was a way to withdraw the money, but we clarified that it was up to the casino to decide on any payouts or refunds. We concluded the complaint due to the breach of the casino's terms and conditions by the player.

The player from Argentina was facing issues with Mystake Casino, unable to withdraw his funds or place any bets. The problem started when he tried to verify his account and withdraw $15,000, which was left processing indefinitely. Despite his attempts to contact the casino about this issue, he received no response. His account showed a total balance of $20,243, made up of both deposits and winnings, but he was unable to access these funds. The Complaints Team attempted to investigate the issue, but due to the player's lack of response to their inquiries, they were unable to proceed and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had an issue where her deposit to the casino never arrived in her account. We advised her to contact her payment provider to investigate the issue as the casino usually had limited control over such matters. Despite extending the complaint response time by 7 days, we received no response from the player. Hence, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had been waiting for a withdrawal of $140000 Argentine pesos since the 13th of March and had received no information about the delay from the casino. The player had previously verified his account and had successfully withdrawn smaller amounts. After 14 days of waiting and no response from the casino, the player contacted us for assistance. We intervened by contacting the casino on the player's behalf. The casino apologized for the inconvenience and re-credited the funds to the player's account, allowing him to successfully withdraw them. The issue was then marked as 'resolved'.

The player from the United Kingdom had deposited £3000 to Mystake via SEPA. However, after more than 24 hours, the funds had not been credited to her casino account. We had advised her to contact her payment provider to investigate the issue, as it typically took approximately one month to resolve such matters. The casino's ability to intervene was limited in this case. Despite extending the response deadline by 7 days, the player did not respond to our messages or questions. Therefore, we could not investigate further and were forced to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had reported a deposit issue with an online casino. Despite the money having been deducted from his virtual wallet, it hadn't been credited to his casino account. We had suggested the player contact his payment provider, Mercado Pago, for investigation. The player had insisted the issue wasn't on his end and provided proof of the transaction. We had advised him to forward this evidence to the casino's support and wait for the funds to be located. However, the player failed to respond further, which prevented us from continuing the investigation. Consequently, the complaint was rejected.

An Italian player had issues uploading verification documents to her new My Stake account because they were registered with a previously closed account. Despite multiple emails, she hadn't been able to resolve this issue. We attempted to gather more details about her old and new account, including the reasons for creating a new one, deposit details, and current balance. However, the player did not respond to our queries. As a result, we couldn't investigate further and had to reject the complaint due to lack of cooperation from the player's side.

The player from the United Kingdom had deposited money into the casino four days ago, but the funds hadn't been reflected in his casino account despite having left his bank. The player had provided evidence and had expressed dissatisfaction with the casino's response. We suggested that the player contact his payment provider to investigate the issue. Later, the player confirmed that the money had been credited to his casino account. We marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from Argentina had attempted to deposit 2200 Argentine pesos twice but they were not credited to his account. He claimed that his bank had confirmed the transfers were successful. Despite the Complaints Team's efforts to assist by requesting further communication between the player and his bank, the player did not respond. Consequently, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had reported that he was unable to see the 2200 ARS deposit made to his casino account. We had advised him to contact his payment provider for an investigation and suggested not to deposit any more funds until the issue was resolved. We had extended the complaint's time frame to allow for a full month of investigation. The player had mentioned a possible transfer to Papagos SA but did not provide further information or communication records with the casino. Due to lack of response from the player, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hadn’t been received yet. The Complaints Team had advised the player to wait for at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before submitting a complaint. They also extended the timer for response by 7 days. However, due to the player's lack of response to further inquiries, the complaint couldn't be investigated further and was subsequently rejected.

The player from Argentina had experienced difficulties with depositing money into the casino as he had used a third-party account. Although his account had been verified for over a year, the deposited balance never arrived. We had informed him that using a third-party account was against casino terms and could result in account blocking. The original account owner could have requested a refund, but there wasn't much that could have been done from our or the player's side. The player failed to respond to further communication, leading us to reject the complaint due to insufficient information.

An Argentinian player had made two transfers worth $15,000 each through Mercado Pago to Stake, which were not credited in the app. Despite the player having made several claims and provided proofs of the transfers, no resolution had been presented. We had advised the player to contact his payment provider and to refrain from depositing more funds until the issue was resolved. However, the player did not respond to our follow-up messages and therefore, we were unable to further investigate the issue. Consequently, we had to reject the complaint due to lack of response from the player.

The player from Argentina had made a deposit of $2,200 which was not credited to her casino account, yet it had been deducted from her digital wallet. We had advised her to contact her payment provider for investigation. Since the player did not respond to our follow-up messages, we had to reject the case due to lack of communication. The issue remained unresolved due to the player's inactivity.

The player from Argentina had encountered an issue where his deposit was not acknowledged by the casino. The Complaints Team had advised him to contact his payment provider for investigation and to refrain from making any more deposits until the issue was resolved. Despite extending the response period, the player failed to respond to the team's messages and questions. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to the lack of communication from the player.

The player from the United Kingdom had been trying for three days to withdraw their winnings, but the casino kept asking them to change the IBAN. However, they couldn't do so as this was the only number they had from their bank. We attempted to assist the player and provided guidance on possible reasons for the withdrawal delay such as unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. We also extended the complaint response time by 7 days. However, due to lack of response from the player, we were unable to proceed with the investigation or provide potential solutions and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had reported not receiving her deposit at Mystake Casino after four days. We had advised her to contact her payment provider for an investigation, as the casino could not assist in such cases. We had also recommended that she refrained from depositing more funds until the issue was resolved. However, the player did not respond to our inquiries for further information, leading us to reject the complaint due to a lack of response.

The player from Poland had completed the required account and video verifications. However, the casino had blocked his $1565 withdrawal and had been unresponsive for over 5 days. The player reported that the casino had kept telling him to wait without providing a clear timeframe. He also clarified that he hadn't used any bonuses and that his winnings were from sports betting. As we didn't have enough insight into issues related to sports betting, we recommended other websites that might have been able to help him. The complaint was rejected due to our inability to assist with sports betting-related issues.

An Argentinian player had complained about a delay in depositing money into their casino account. The player had claimed to have contacted their payment provider, Mercado Pago, and was told the money had arrived at the casino. The Complaints Team had asked the player to provide additional evidence, including screenshots of the deposit receipt and deposit history, as well as communication with the payment provider. However, the player failed to respond within the given time frame, which resulted in the complaint being rejected due to lack of further information.

The player from Indonesia had reported a delay in his withdrawal process, despite having completed a video verification on 02/21/2024 and receiving no clear timeline from the casino. After the Complaints Team had intervened and clarified the importance of the KYC process, the player confirmed that he didn't need to provide any additional documents for verification. Following communication with the casino, the player informed the team that he had received his withdrawal. The issue was then marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Argentina had deposited money into her Mystake casino account, but the funds had not shown up. Despite having reached out to Mystake's chat support, she was only advised to wait. We had suggested that she contact her payment provider for an investigation, as the casino could not assist in this case. We had extended the response time by 7 days, but the player did not respond, hence we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Spain was struggling to verify his residence to an online casino as he lived with relatives and didn't have any bills in his name. Despite providing current documents, his residency was not confirmed. The player had been trying to verify his account for about 3 days and had already verified his identity and email. However, the casino rejected his proof of residency documents. We asked the player for further details and to provide the communication between him and the casino, but the player did not respond. Therefore, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had deposited money through Mercado Pago to the casino, but the deposit hadn't appeared in his casino account. He had sought help from the casino's support team but to no avail. We had advised the player to contact his payment provider for an investigation and to halt further deposits until the issue was resolved. Despite our efforts to assist, the player hadn't responded to our messages, leading us to close the complaint due to lack of further information.

The player from the US had deposited $8 using Dogecoin which was not reflected in their MyStake account and questioned the delay. We had advised the player to contact their payment provider for an investigation and asked several questions to better understand the situation. However, due to the lack of response from the player, we were unable to proceed with further investigation or provide potential solutions. The complaint was consequently rejected, but could be reopened if the player decided to communicate further.

The player from Argentina had deposited money into an online casino four days prior, but the amount had not been credited to his account. Upon his raising the issue, we had recommended that he contact his payment provider for investigation, as the casino typically had limited control over such matters. He later confirmed that his bank had transferred the funds. Despite efforts to follow up on the status of his deposit, the player failed to respond, which led us to close the complaint. The resolution was hindered by the player's lack of communication.

The player from Argentina had made four deposits to her casino account, but these were never reflected. She had demanded a resolution in the form of the deposits being credited or rectified. We had advised her to contact her payment provider to investigate the issue, as it might have taken approximately one month. The player failed to respond to our messages and questions, leading us to reject the complaint due to insufficient information.

The player from Argentina had made a deposit of $3000 using Mercado Pago over 72 hours prior. Despite the payment having been successful on the payment app, the funds had not reached his casino account. We had recommended the player to contact his payment provider to investigate the issue, noting that this process could take approximately a month. We had left the complaint open for a month for updates. However, due to the player's lack of response to our messages and questions, we were unable to further investigate and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had deposited to his casino account, but it was not credited. Despite lodging a complaint and providing a receipt, there had been no response from the casino. The player had not seen any progress even after four days of investigation. We had suggested the player contact his payment provider and provide us with the proof of deposit and bank statements. However, despite extending the deadline by seven days, the player did not respond to our queries. As a result, we had to reject the complaint due to lack of further information.

The player from Argentina had requested a withdrawal to his MercadoPago account but discovered the transaction was rejected and another transaction under the name LITECOIN was approved instead. He had not received any information or response about where the funds had been sent. The player claimed he hadn't made the Litecoin transaction, and the funds were not sent to his verified Litecoin wallet. The casino had provided transaction details, which didn't match the player's Litecoin address. Further investigation had shown that the player's account was accessed via a VPN, including at the time of the disputed withdrawal. The casino argued that they had every reason to believe the withdrawal was initiated by the player, as the account was accessed with correct user credentials. As a result, the complaint had been rejected due to lack of evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of the casino.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. His money hadn't been received yet. The Complaints Team had advised the player that withdrawal processes might take some time, possibly due to KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. They had suggested the player wait for at least 14 days before raising a complaint. However, the player failed to respond to the follow-up messages, leading to the complaint being rejected due to lack of further information.

The player from the United Kingdom had experienced issues with several withdrawal rejections and a missing amount of £751 that did not return to his account as claimed by the casino. The player had provided transaction proof and had been in constant communication with the casino. After a thorough review of the case and discussion with the casino, the player had realized a misunderstanding in his transactions. He had acknowledged his mistake and requested to cancel the complaint. The complaint was therefore rejected due to the player's misunderstanding of his transaction history.

The player from Spain had experienced difficulties depositing money due to limited bank verification options and issues with residential verification, as she lived with her parents and lacked utility bills or documents proving ownership. After communicating with our team, the player had been able to resolve the issue and successfully deposit money. The player had expressed gratitude for the help received, and we had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from the UK had an issue with the account verification process at MyStake Casino. Despite successfully completing two stages, his proof of identity was not accepted. He attempted to communicate with the casino via email but received no response. The Complaints Team extended the timer for his response by 7 days, but the player did not respond. Therefore, we had to reject the complaint due to lack of further information from the player.

The player from Morocco, who had been previously blocked from Mystake, had difficulty verifying a new account due to identity data saved from the old one. Despite multiple attempts at communication with the casino and providing necessary documents, the player received no response. We had attempted to assist by asking for more information about the closure of the first account and the creation of the new one. However, the player did not respond within the extended time frame, hence we had no choice but to reject the complaint due to lack of cooperation from the player's side.

The player from Belgium had experienced difficulties withdrawing a deposit of 500 euros from Mystake. After his initial deposit, his account had been blocked due to a declared gambling addiction. The player had reported that the casino and payment provider were unresponsive to his inquiries. The casino reviewed the case and allowed the player to withdraw his funds without any administrative fee. The player had successfully received his deposit. The issue was successfully resolved.

The player from Argentina had made a deposit, but the amount had been deducted and not credited to his casino account. Despite having used the same deposit method previously without any issue, this time the transaction did not go through as expected. The player had contacted his payment provider, MercadoPago, and confirmed the transaction was approved on their end. The Complaints Team had asked for additional documentation, including a screenshot of the deposit receipt and deposit history, along with communication with the bank and the casino. However, the player had not responded to these requests. As a result, we were unable to proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint due to the lack of further information from the player.

The player from Pennsylvania had used a bonus and had successfully met the wagering requirements, which supposedly allowed a withdrawal of up to $350. The player had continued betting and won $3000 but the casino only allowed a withdrawal of $350, referring back to the initial bonus rules. The player had argued that he should have been allowed to withdraw the full amount as he had completed the wagering requirements and the additional winnings were made after this. The casino's position was that the maximum withdrawal limit still applied as the winnings were made using the bonus. The Complaints Team had tried to mediate the situation, but the casino did not agree to pay the full amount. The casino later updated their terms and conditions to clarify their rules regarding bonus winnings, but they did not retroactively apply these changes to the player's case. Therefore, the issue remained unresolved.

The player from Argentina had reported an issue where his deposit had not been reflected in his casino account. We had advised him to contact his payment provider to investigate the issue, as the casino could not intervene in this matter. We had also requested additional information to help resolve the issue. However, the player did not respond to our messages and inquiries. As a result, we had been unable to proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had reported that his last two withdrawals had not been deposited into his account despite appearing as successful in the transaction history. He had also claimed that the casino's customer service had not responded to his inquiries for a week. We had advised the player to wait at least 14 days for the withdrawal process to complete, as delays could occur due to reasons such as pending KYC verification or high volume of withdrawal requests. However, the player did not respond to our messages, thus we were unable to further investigate his issue. As a result, the complaint was rejected.

An Italian player had made two deposits totaling 1000 euros via SEPA bank transfer and the funds had been deducted from their bank account but were not reflecting in their casino account. The player had attempted to resolve this through the casino's customer service with no result. We had suggested the player to contact their payment provider for further investigation, as the casino could not directly intervene in this matter. However, due to the player's lack of response, we were unable to proceed and the complaint was rejected.

The player from the UK had cashed out a total of £5940 but hadn't received the funds after two days. The casino had assured him that they had sent the money, but his bank couldn't confirm any incoming payments. The Complaints Team had advised the player that withdrawal processing could take up to 14 days. Later, the player confirmed that the payment had reached his bank and requested to cancel the complaint. The issue had been successfully resolved.

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 had confirmed that his account was fully verified and both his withdrawal requests had been processed by the casino, but he had not received the funds. Despite our attempts to get more information and extend the complaint resolution time frame, the player did not respond. Therefore, we were unable to investigate the matter further and the complaint had been rejected.

The player from Argentina had a locked casino account with a significant amount of money in it, and was seeking assistance. The player's account got blocked when he attempted to withdraw his winnings from playing the slot machine game, Money Train 2. The casino advised him to change his password and then contact them for password verification to enable withdrawal. However, the player had not yet received a response from the casino. We requested further communication from the player to assist in the investigation, but the player did not respond. As a result, we were unable to further investigate and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting his complaint. The payment hadn't been processed yet. The player alleged that the casino had closed his account and confiscated his winnings of £26,000. The casino claimed the player had duplicate accounts, which was a violation of their terms and conditions. The Complaints Team had requested supporting evidence from the casino. The player denied having duplicate accounts and suggested that the casino's accusations only arose after he won a significant amount of money. The case was further complicated by the player's alleged past chargeback. The Complaints Team had extended the complaint's deadline, but the player had not responded, leading to the complaint's rejection.

The player from the United States had fully verified their account, including providing selfies and card photos, only to find their account had been blocked when they tried to withdraw. The casino had also stated that the account would never be reopened with the current funds in it. The player had been unable to provide any previous communication with the casino regarding the account block. He had claimed to have €12,909 in his account at the time of the block. The player had also been banned from the casino's live chat. We had attempted to gather further information, however, since the player's activities were related to sports betting, outside of our jurisdiction, we had been unable to resolve the issue.

The player from Argentina had deposited 2300 pesos into a casino on the 3rd of February via Mercado Pago. He reported that the money had been deducted from his account but was not credited to his casino account. We had suggested that he contact his payment provider to investigate the issue, as the process could have taken approximately one month and the casino could not assist in this matter. We had left the complaint open for a month and extended the timer by 7 days. However, the player did not respond to our messages or questions, leading us to reject the complaint due to a lack of further information.

The player from Argentina had deposited $20000 pesos into Mystake casino, but the amount had not been credited to his account. Despite having contacted the casino's support multiple times, he had received no response. We had advised the player to contact his payment provider for investigation. However, due to his lack of response to our follow-up queries, we had been unable to proceed with the investigation. Consequently, the complaint had been rejected.

The player from the UK had his account closed by MyStake following a self-exclusion request. He then created a new account and won £1200. However, when he tried to withdraw his winnings, he was informed that his ID was linked to another account. He was awaiting a response. We had reviewed the case the player had not explicitly stated he had lost control over his gambling. We explained that opening multiple accounts was prohibited and could lead to withdrawal issues. We recommended that the player contact the casino and reiterate his wish to be protected from gambling due to a gambling problem. The player accepted the situation and expressed gratitude for our efforts. The complaint was subsequently closed.

The player from Argentina had deposited the minimum amount of money as specified, but it had not been credited to his casino account, despite being deducted from his virtual wallet. We had suggested him to contact his payment provider for investigation, as the casino usually could not intervene in such cases. However, the player failed to respond to our further communication, which led us to reject the complaint due to lack of cooperation.

The player from Argentina had deposited $10,000 to MyStake via her husband's LEMON virtual wallet, but the funds were not credited to her account. She had requested for the funds to be either credited or refunded. It was revealed that the player had used her husband's account, which was a violation of the casino's rules. We had advised her to refrain from using third-party payment methods and that her husband should have requested a refund once the funds were credited. However, due to the violation, we were unable to assist further and the complaint was rejected.

The player from Belgium had won nearly 10,000 euros at the casino but had faced difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to repetitive documentation requests from the casino. Despite having sent all requested documents, he felt that the casino had been intentionally delaying the withdrawal process. As the player had used his winnings, the team concluded there was not much they could do to assist further.

The player from the United Kingdom claimed that the casino games seemed rigged, estimating the Return to Player (RTP) to be only about 3%, leading to a poor gaming experience. We had informed the player that we couldn't proceed without evidence and had requested her complete game history to investigate her claims. However, due to a lack of response from the player to our messages and questions, we had to reject the case. Despite this, we remained open to assist in resolving the matter if the player decided to provide the necessary information in the future.

The player from Australia had encountered issues with withdrawing her winnings from an online casino. Despite correctly providing her IBAN number and reaching out via emails, her withdrawal attempts had been continuously rejected. The Complaints Team had attempted to gather more information for further investigation, including account verification status and the nature of the winnings. However, due to the player's lack of response to the inquiries, we were unable to proceed with the investigation. As a result, the complaint had been rejected.

The player from Argentina had made a withdrawal of 5000 through Bitcoin but only received 2000. The casino support had not been able to provide a clear explanation, having claimed that the transaction amount could change. The player's account had already been verified and her winnings were accumulated with real money. We had suggested she contact the payment provider for a statement regarding the withdrawal fees. However, she did not respond to our messages and questions within the given time frame, which led us to reject the complaint due to insufficient information.

The player from the United Kingdom is having withdrawal issues at the casino due to failed ID verification despite providing a clear picture of driving license. The player has reached out to the casino three times but has received no response.

The player from Argentina had encountered an issue with withdrawing his winnings due to an error in the email address associated with his online casino account. Despite our team's efforts to reach out and provide assistance, the player had not responded to our inquiries. As a result, we were unable to proceed with the investigation, leading to the rejection of the complaint. The casino had provided instructions for the player to contact their support for account issues, but it remained unclear whether the player followed these instructions.

The player from Italy had difficulties uploading documents for verification at an online casino. Their driving license and email had been successfully verified, but the casino did not accept any of their address proof documents. The casino clarified that the player's document didn't include the issue date, which was a requirement. We reached out to the player to provide the necessary documents, however, due to a lack of response from the player, we were unable to proceed with the investigation or provide potential solutions.

The player from the United Kingdom had reported a gambling problem to the casino but her account was not blocked, which resulted in additional deposits being made. She was requesting a refund for the deposits made after informing the casino of her issue. We had asked for evidence of her request for self-exclusion, but she failed to provide any. Her claim of a non-working live chat feature and lack of response from the casino could not be substantiated. Despite having extended the response time, she did not provide any further information. Therefore, we could not investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had an issue where his deposit of $2200 (Argentinian pesos) had been deducted from his digital currency account but was not credited to his MyStake Casino account. He had sought a correction or refund. The Complaints Team had advised him to contact his payment provider and to refrain from making any more deposits until the issue was resolved. Later, the player confirmed that the issue had been resolved and his deposit had been successfully credited to his casino account. The Complaints Team then marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The Dutch player had deposited significant amounts at Mystake, later lost €50.000 due to withdrawal limits, and an additional €1615 after believing their account was closed. Despite having communicated that they were unable to control their gambling and citing the illegality of the casino offering services to them, the casino allegedly hadn't closed the account at that time. The player had provided proof of their communication with the casino and their subsequent deposits. The casino claimed they hadn't detected any gambling addiction problem until January when they closed the account. They also mentioned having reached an agreement with the player, which the player confirmed, stating they would receive a refund of €700. The case was left pending confirmation of the agreement's execution and payment from the casino.

The player from the UK had created a second account on Mystake after closing the first one a year prior due to a gambling problem. After depositing £800, she discovered that having duplicate accounts was against the rules. The casino had processed a withdrawal of £974 and informed her that only £90 would be returned, despite £1074 being in her wallet. The player had provided an email requesting self-exclusion from her first account, but it didn't specify a gambling problem. Consequently, we couldn't assist her further and had to reject her complaint as unjustified.

The player from the UK was struggling with the verification process because he used a prepaid digital wallet and the provider was not offering necessary documents. Additionally, he was unsatisfied with the different pre-set responses received from the casino. We asked the player to provide additional information and extended the response time, but the player failed to respond. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and the complaint was rejected.

The player from the UK had complained about being allowed excessive gambling despite self-exclusion and lack of protective measures during a vulnerable period. She alleged that the casino took £4000 from her before she self-excluded. Despite our team's efforts to gather more information and clarify the circumstances surrounding the alleged incident, the player had not responded to our messages. Consequently, we were unable to investigate further and the complaint had been rejected.

The player from Argentina had unintentionally activated a free bonus that interfered with their betting style. The bonus had been accidentally activated through a notification, and the player had been unable to contact the casino due to the absence of a communication channel. The bonus, which the player had not used, had been charged to their account. However, the issue was ultimately resolved by the casino, and the player had expressed their satisfaction with the resolution.

The player from Italy had experienced technical issues with the casino website, which she claimed had caused her to lose €500. She had reported the problem to the casino's support team but received no response. Consequently, she had requested for her account to be closed. We had attempted to assist by asking the player for more details, including whether any balance was lost due to the errors and whether any balance remained on her account when she decided to close it. However, the player did not respond to our inquiries, leaving us unable to further investigate the issue. The complaint had been rejected due to lack of communication from the player.

The player from the UK had opened an account with mystake under a new email, after previously closing one. He had deposited over £1400, but his document submission for withdrawal was rejected on grounds of a duplicate account. The player did not contact the casino about reopening his old account. We pointed out that the creation of multiple accounts by the same individual was a breach of the casino's terms and conditions. As such, the player's account was rightfully closed by the casino and no refunds were due. The complaint was rejected due to the player's violation of the rules.

The player from the UK had a pending withdrawal from Mystake.com. The casino had denied his withdrawal request, demanding additional KYC procedures. Additionally, the player's account had been locked. The player had provided the requested documents but was dissatisfied with the casino's communication. The player did not respond to our inquiries, which led us to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had deposited 30 thousand Argentine pesos via bank transfer, but the amount had not been reflected in his casino account. We had advised him to contact his payment provider. We also recommended that he should not deposit any more funds until the issue was resolved. However, the player did not respond to our messages, which led us to reject the complaint due to a lack of necessary cooperation.

The player from the United Kingdom had initially requested for his account to be closed and subsequently asked for it to be reopened. Although the account was successfully reopened, the casino closed it again, alleging dual accounts. At that time, over £1000 was stuck in the account. The player claimed that he had no knowledge of the two accounts and accused the casino of allowing him to fund the account, place bets, and then withhold his funds due to a lack of control. The Complaints Team, after reviewing the evidence and communication between the player and the casino, found discrepancies in the player's claims and concluded that the casino had acted correctly. The team agreed with the casino's decision to refund only the player's last deposit. However, the player insisted on the return of all disputed funds, which we considered unjustified and closed the case accordingly.

The player from Argentina had an issue with a deposit that was not processed by the casino. Upon receiving the complaint, we advised the player to contact his payment provider for an investigation, as the casino typically could not intervene in such cases. We kept the complaint open for a month for updates. However, despite extending the response time by an additional 7 days, the player did not respond. As a result, we were unable to further investigate, leading to the complaint being rejected.

The player from Spain was facing issues with withdrawals. After he submitted the requested card photos, he had not received a response and the withdrawals were still pending. We had extended the timer by 7 days for the player to provide additional information. However, the player did not respond to our messages and questions. As a result, we couldn't investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the UK, who was registered on Gamstop due to gambling addiction, had lost £3,000 in Mystake casino, which didn't provide immediate self-exclusion functionality. The player was seeking a full refund. The player claimed that she contacted the casino for self-exclusion but they failed to act promptly, leading to further losses. After reviewing the case and the correspondence between the player and the casino, we found that the casino did eventually block the player's account. However, due to the casino not being licensed under UKGC and the player's failure to clearly state the reason for account deactivation in her initial request, we were unable to proceed with asking the casino for a refund. The complaint was therefore rejected.

The player from Italy had mistakenly activated a bonus on his account and had sought help to deactivate it. We had reached out to the player for more information about the bonus and whether they had attempted to cancel it directly or contact the casino. However, despite extending the response time, the player had failed to respond to our inquiries. As a result, we could not proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had a complaint similar to another, having experienced issues with withdrawing funds from My Stake Casino. He had closed his old account and opened a new one, made multiple deposits and won a large sum of money. However, the casino had closed his account without providing a reason when he tried to withdraw his winnings. The player had argued that he only had one active account as the old one was permanently closed and that he didn't violate any terms and conditions. He also claimed that he didn't use any bonuses and that the winnings were fair. However, the Complaints Team had clarified that creating a new account instead of reopening the old one was against the casino's terms, regardless of whether the old account was active or not. They concluded that the player had breached the casino's terms, thus they had the right to terminate his account. The complaint was closed without resolving the player's issue.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal of £140 from MyStake Casino but was unable to contact the site's live chat and was concerned as the withdrawal status remained cancelable. The player later informed us that the matter had been resolved and the withdrawal was paid out.

The player from Argentina had made a deposit worth 40,000 pesos to his MyStake account, but the funds hadn't appeared in his account. The player had made previous successful deposits and had contacted the casino with proof of his transfer. The casino had acknowledged his complaint and promised to investigate the issue. We had advised the player to also contact his payment provider, and extended the complaint timeline to allow the casino ample time for investigation. However, the player had failed to respond to our subsequent messages and the complaint was eventually rejected due to lack of communication from the player's side.

The player from Argentina had reported that she had deposited 7000 pesos into her casino account, but the money was deducted from her virtual wallet and did not appear in her casino account. We had advised her to contact her payment provider for an investigation, as the casino could not intervene in these cases. She later mentioned another deposit of 3000 pesos that was not credited to her account. Despite our efforts to communicate and resolve the issue, the player did not respond to our follow-up inquiries. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Morocco activated a €165 bonus and subsequently deposited €550 of their own money. However, the casino considers the entire balance as part of the bonus, and the player is currently unable to play or withdraw funds.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, her winnings hadn't been received yet. Despite the Complaints Team's advice to wait for at least 14 days for the withdrawal process and their extension of the timer by 7 days, the player did not respond to further inquiries. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the UK had reported an issue with a deposit made four days prior, which had not been credited to their casino account. The casino's support team had advised the player to wait. This had not been the player's first deposit, and there had been no issues with their bank. The Complaints Team had requested evidence of communication between the player and their bank/payment provider and the casino. The player later confirmed that the issue had been resolved.

The player from Morocco had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting his complaint. His money had not been received yet. He had confirmed that he had successfully withdrawn in the past, passed the KYC verification, and never activated a bonus. The casino had stated that the transaction was successful on their end. However, the player had claimed that the USDT address provided by the casino didn't match his. The casino had suggested that the player might have entered the address incorrectly. Despite attempts to resolve the issue, the player had been unable to provide evidence that he had submitted the correct address for withdrawal. Consequently, we had concluded that the casino had made the payment to the address provided by the player, and there was nothing more we could do. The complaint was therefore rejected.

The player from Argentina had unintentionally clicked on a 1400 pesos sports betting bonus and was unable to use his deposited money. He had requested for the bonus to be removed so he could continue playing. The player had confirmed that he did not place any bets with the bonus funds and had made numerous unsuccessful attempts to contact the casino. We had invited the casino to clarify the situation, and they confirmed that the player did not have any current bonus. The player later confirmed that the bonus had been removed after several complaints and he was able to play. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system, thanking both the player and the casino for their cooperation.

The player from the United Kingdom had experienced an issue with a deposit he had made in December that was not credited to his account. Despite having provided all necessary documentation, the issue had remained unresolved. Following his decision to close his account, he had sought a return of his uncredited deposit. After several exchanges between the player, the complaints team, and the casino, the casino finally acknowledged the deposit and credited it to the player's account. However, since the player had already closed his account, he had requested the funds to be transferred back to his bank account. The issue was ultimately resolved with the successful transfer of funds back to the player's bank account.

The player from Spain had deposited 10 euros into their myStake account but the money did not reflect despite them being charged. We had advised the player to contact their payment provider for further investigation. Despite extending the response time, the player did not provide any further correspondence. Consequently, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

A player from Sweden points out that the casino recklessly reopens permanently closed accounts without inquiries, promoting gambling addiction. Despite lodging a complaint, it was rejected and she received bonuses from the casino's sister sites. She lost over 13,000 in a single day after her account was reopened. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from Argentina had an issue with a bonus activated on his account at an online casino, which prevented him from placing bets. He wished for the bonus to be removed so he could utilize his own funds, amounting to 8600 pesos. He hadn't contacted the casino support about this issue. We advised the player to reach out to the casino support and ask for the removal of the bonus. However, the player did not respond to our messages, which led us to reject the complaint due to lack of communication.

The player from the United Kingdom had accidentally sent approximately £900 to the MyStake Casino TRX wallet, much more than he had intended. The casino had been informed about the issue and the player had been told that the matter was being handled. However, he hadn't received any communication or updates for three weeks. After we got involved and invited the casino to the conversation, the casino confirmed that they had found the funds sent in error and credited 1147 USDT (equivalent to 905 GBP) to the player's account. The player had expressed satisfaction with this resolution.

An Argentinian player had won 8,000 and was unable to access their winnings. The casino was not responding to their emails. We had advised the player that withdrawal processes might take a couple of days or weeks, and to be patient. However, due to lack of response from the player to our messages and questions, we were unable to proceed with further investigation and had to reject the complaint. We emphasized that the player had the option to reopen the complaint in the future if they wished to do so.

The player from Italy had requested his casino account to be closed for personal reasons and later expressed a desire to reopen it. However, the casino's support had stated that reopening the account or creating a new one was not possible. The player had confirmed that there were no funds left in the account. We had informed him that we couldn't compel casinos to reopen accounts and had advised against creating other accounts unless specifically permitted by the casino.

The player from the UK had won 29 pounds on the Big Bass Splash game, but the funds were not credited to her account. The winnings were not recorded in the game history and the player didn't have any proof of the win. We had suggested that the player contact the game provider or the licensing authority for further investigation, as they might have had a different game history recorded. Due to lack of evidence, we couldn't proceed with the complaint and it had been rejected.

The player from Spain had been struggling to complete the address verification required for withdrawal as he didn't have the required documents (residential certificate or utility bills) in his name. Despite having contacted the casino's support a few months prior, he hadn't received a response. After communication with the casino and the player, the casino clarified the necessary documents for verification. Despite this, the player had been unable to provide the necessary documentation and had not responded to further communication. Consequently, we had to reject the complaint due to the lack of response.

The player from France was facing issues with accessing winnings derived from a promotional code at an online casino. Despite having completed all necessary verification procedures, the casino alleged that he had breached the bonus conditions and intended to deduct the corresponding amount from his balance. The player denied any wrongdoing and claimed that the casino was refusing to provide a detailed explanation for their actions. However, after reviewing the evidence provided by the casino, we found that the player had violated the casino's policy by using two accounts. As a result, we had rejected the player's complaint.

The player from Argentina was unable to access his online casino account, which contained roughly $5,400,000 ARS. He had been given a date of December 15, 2023, to lift his withdrawal restrictions, but was facing login issues at the time. The player alleged that his account had been wrongfully blocked and his funds had been reduced without his consent. The casino argued that the player's account had not been blocked and his funds had not been confiscated. The player also alleged that he had been asked to pay a fee to reactivate his account via a Telegram communication, which the casino denied, stating that the said Telegram account was not their official one. We, the complaints team, after reviewing all evidence and communication, concluded that the player's disputed winnings had been lost by playing at the casino and the complaint was closed as unjustified.

The player from Italy had been involuntarily logged out from the casino site and received an 'Account card does not exist' message when he tried to log back in. He had about 180 euros in the account. Upon investigation, we discovered that the player had previously closed an account with the casino and opened a new one, violating the casino's terms and conditions that prohibited multiple accounts. The casino had allowed the player to withdraw the last deposited amount of 50 euros and subsequently blocked the account. We agreed with the casino's action due to the player's violation and thus, we rejected the player's complaint.

The player from Argentina had been unable to verify his identity, despite having provided photographs and completed a facial scan. The player managed to resolve the issue independently. Upon confirmation of the issue's resolution, we had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Italy had attempted to withdraw €139.65 winnings from Mystake via SEPA, but the transaction was rejected and was automatically initiated via Litecoin. Changing passwords had not resolved the issue. After the Complaints Team had asked for additional information about the payment method used for depositing funds and the ownership of the Litecoin e-wallet, the player did not respond. As a result, we had been forced to reject the case due to lack of response, halting further investigation and potential resolution.

The player from the United Kingdom who had a gambling addiction had requested an account closure and deposit prevention, but the casino had not acted on the request, leading to the player losing a significant amount of money. The player had demanded a refund and alleged that the casino was non-responsive to emails. The player had provided a list of transactions made after his request, totalling £7636.90. He had also claimed to have lost an additional £650 in winnings, but was not as concerned about this amount. Despite having provided email proof of his self-exclusion request, the casino had denied receiving such an email. The player had then provided a video as evidence, but the quality had been low and it had not been possible to definitively determine if the email was sent. We had concluded that self-exclusion only applied once confirmed by the casino team, and since the player had not received any confirmation, he was not eligible for a refund. The player had been advised to file an official complaint with the casino's licensing authority.

The player from the United Kingdom was experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings of £790 from MyStake Casino using cryptocurrency, after multiple unsuccessful attempts. The casino had requested a photo of his debit card for verification. However, despite our efforts to engage and assist him, the player did not respond to our inquiries. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and the complaint was rejected.

The player from Argentina had unintentionally activated a reload bonus, which was restricting his actions at the time. He had requested the removal of this unused bonus. The Complaints Team had attempted to gather more information about the situation by asking the player several questions. However, due to the player's lack of response, we were unable to proceed with an investigation or provide potential solutions. Consequently, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Argentina was unable to play games due to an active bonus and sought assistance to cancel it, as there wasn't an immediate opt-out option. This issue also prevented him from making withdrawals. We attempted to assist by requesting further details and suggesting direct communication with the casino. However, due to the player's lack of response to our inquiries, we were unable to proceed with the investigation or provide potential solutions. The complaint was consequently rejected.

The player from Argentina had attempted to deposit 10,000 ARS into the casino but mistakenly entered 10,080 ARS, which resulted in the deposit not being credited to her game account. We had suggested that the player contact her payment provider to investigate the issue and had advised her not to deposit more funds until the issue was resolved. However, due to a lack of response from the player to our queries, we had been unable to proceed with the investigation or provide potential solutions. The complaint was therefore rejected, but the option to reopen it remained available for the player.

The player from Nigeria, who had used his account for over two years, had his account abruptly blocked after he made a profit. The account was under investigation, a process that could have lasted up to six months, with the player's winnings of 600 Euros being held during that time. The player had stated that he only participated in sports betting. We had informed him that our platform primarily dealt with issues related to online casinos and lacked the necessary insight to handle sports betting complaints. Although we had offered to contact the casino for more information, we had to reject the player's complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had won around £8k but had encountered issues with account verification. The casino had informed him that they would only pay the most recent deposit of £444 due to a previous account that had been closed, constituting a breach in their terms and conditions. Consequently, the complaint had been rejected due to the player's intentional violation of the casino's policy on multiple accounts. It was later revealed that the player's first account was closed due to a gambling problem, and the casino eventually agreed to refund all deposits made in the second account. However, the player had reported not receiving the payment, and had insisted on not having requested a withdrawal via cryptocurrency. The casino had provided evidence of the withdrawal request made from the player's account to a cryptocurrency wallet. The casino's evidence showed multiple accesses from an Argentinian IP address, which had led to the withdrawal request. Due to the nature of cryptocurrency, the funds could not be traced or redeemed. We had been unable to assist further, and the complaint had been closed. We had advised the player to contact the Curacao eGaming authority, as they had more tools to assist players in such situations.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, his winnings hadn't been received at that time. The player later received his money, but the amount was £145 less than expected due to currency conversion rates. The player had been asked to provide relevant communication between him and the casino, but he failed to respond. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom opened a new account with MyStake Casino after being unable to access his old one. After depositing £2,000 and winning £29,503, the casino announced account closure without providing a reason.

The player from the UK had purchased a £300 bonus on a slot machine named “Jack Frost” on MyStake Casino. However, the bonus did not load because of a glitch, and the money was deducted from his account. Despite him providing transaction history as proof, the casino had claimed that he 'lost the round' and subsequently removed him from their website. The player did not respond to further inquiries from us, resulting in the complaint being rejected due to a lack of additional information.

The player from the United Kingdom had developed a gambling problem after losing £2,560 within weeks, making multiple deposits daily on the “chicken” game. Despite having had a gambling block on his card, the player had used SEPA for depositing. The player felt that the casino's game was designed against the customer's favor. We had attempted to assist the player by requesting additional information and extending the response time. However, due to the player's lack of response, we were unable to proceed with the investigation or provide potential solutions. The complaint was therefore rejected, but the player had the option to reopen it in the future.

The player from Spain had experienced issues with his account verification at an online casino, despite having initially verified his account and won 500€. His withdrawal request had been denied due to his account suddenly becoming unverified. After the player had contacted the Complaints Team, they had facilitated communication with the casino. The casino had initially stated that the player's account was verified and he could withdraw his winnings. However, the player had reported persisting issues with account verification and withdrawal. After multiple interactions, the casino had finally resolved the technical glitch, allowing the player to withdraw his winnings via bank transfer. The player had confirmed the receipt of his winnings, thus concluding the complaint.

The player from UK won £140 without using any bonuses. However, he mistakenly activated a bonus before attempting a withdrawal and is now unable to withdraw his winnings due to the activated bonus. The player seeks assistance in cancelling the active bonus. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from Germany, after having a verified account, is facing difficulties withdrawing funds via Jeton Wallet due to alleged technical issues. Despite repeated attempts, the problem persists. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from the UK had deposited money and won a large sum at Mystake.com. While he tried to complete the verification process, his account was closed due to accusations of sending fake verification documents. This had prevented the player from withdrawing his winnings or the original deposit. After we reviewed the evidence provided by both the player and the casino, we confirmed that the player had indeed submitted falsified documents. Consequently, his complaint was rejected.

The player from Argentina had deposited money and activated a sports betting bonus, but this bonus was preventing him from placing bets. Despite our attempts to communicate and resolve the issue, the player did not respond to our messages and queries. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina deposited money and accepted a bonus promotion without realizing it would restrict him to slot machine games. Now, due to the activated bonus, the casino is not allowing him to withdraw his funds. He has not placed any bets and refuses to do so until the issue is resolved. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from the Netherlands had encountered a problem when attempting to withdraw winnings due to location-related restrictions, despite not using a VPN or false information. The player had been hesitant to verify their identity due to fear of account closure upon discovery of their location. Despite our efforts to assist, the player had decided to cease betting activities and requested account closure. We had extended the time for the player's response, but due to lack of further communication from the player, we had to reject the complaint. However, we remained open to assist should the player have decided to communicate further.

The player from Argentina made a deposit that activated an automatic bonus. Now, they are unable to use the money for playing or withdrawal and requests the bonus to be deactivated. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from Morocco is facing issues withdrawing his winnings from MyStake Casino. Despite numerous attempts and switching payment methods as suggested by the agent, all withdrawal attempts have been rejected. The player is also facing issues with account verification and finds the responses from the support unhelpful. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Argentina had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The player, who had previously completed the KYC verification, was initially unable to withdraw his winnings. However, after some time, he had managed to withdraw part of his balance through a crypto option. Eventually, he had been able to withdraw the rest of his balance, albeit through a more expensive withdrawal method. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved' following the player's confirmation of receiving his winnings.

The player from Argentina, who had initially joined the casino as a minor, had reached the age of majority, but his account was locked preventing him from withdrawing his winnings. The Complaints Team discovered that the player had provided false personal information at the time of registration, stating he was over 18 when he was actually a minor. As a result, the team was unable to assist the player. The player failed to respond to the team's messages and questions, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from the UK who had a previous gambling problem had claimed that the casino had allowed her to continuously deposit without intervention, despite her requests for a time-out period. The casino reportedly had failed to enforce this, leading to further deposits and losses. Although the casino had claimed to have closed the account, the player had maintained that she could still access it. The player had deposited an additional £200 after the casino had informed her that her account had been permanently closed. The casino later claimed that the player had two duplicate accounts, which was against their rules. Despite efforts from our complaints team to mediate the situation, the issue had been rejected since the player stopped responding.

The player from Italy re-registered at Mystake Casino after losing access to his previous account. Having made a €20 deposit, the player is now unable to verify the account or withdraw funds because there is another active account under his name. The player is unable to contact the casino. Since creating multiple accounts is strictly against the Terms and Conditions, we rejected the complaint.

The player from Italy had experienced difficulties with the casino's withdrawal procedures. After his initial withdrawal request, the casino had requested a photo of the credit card used for deposit. The player complied, but the casino subsequently asked for PDFs of other cards that the player did not have. We attempted to assist the player by extending the complaint timer by 7 days and asking for more details about the documents he had already provided. However, the player did not respond to our messages and inquiries, preventing us from further investigating the case. As a result, we had to reject the complaint.

The player from Germany had his Mystake account locked a year ago with €200 in it. Despite having completed several identity verifications, the problem had not been resolved even after the support team had promised reviews within six months. The player had indicated that he mainly engaged in sports betting and did not use bonuses to accumulate his balance. However, as our team primarily dealt with online casino complaints, we lacked the necessary insight to properly handle sports betting issues. As such, we were unable to assist the player in this particular case but provided him with a list of websites that might have been able to help. The complaint was subsequently rejected.

The player from Malta, who was a verified user at mystakecasino.com, had his account closed due to alleged fraud. He had sent a video with documents for verification purposes, suspecting that the use of different yet valid IDs during registration and verification may have caused the issue. The player had €800 in his account balance. The Complaints Team contacted the casino for clarification and requested more details on the case. However, the player managed to resolve the issue independently by communicating directly with the casino's KYC department. Consequently, we marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Italy is facing issues with withdrawing money from MyStake Casino despite having a fully verified profile. His withdrawal demands have been repeatedly rejected, and no reasons have been given so far. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from the UK states that the online casino, mystake.com, is operating without a UKGC license. He accuses them of not recognizing his gambling addiction despite large deposits and of not respecting self-exclusion from another casino operated by the same company. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from Argentina had transferred $10,000 Argentine pesos in multiple transactions to her online casino account. However, the funds did not reflect in her account balance. Despite her repeated complaints, she had received no response from the casino and had sought help to recover her money. She had provided receipts and other transaction details to support her claim. We had extended the complaint timeline multiple times to give the casino ample opportunity to investigate and resolve the issue. However, due to the player's lack of response to our queries for further information, we had to reject the complaint. Despite this, we remained open to assisting her if she decided to resume communication in the future.

The player from Argentina had deposited $209 to his MyStake Casino account but mistakenly sent it to the wrong wallet address. He had provided all necessary information for the casino to rectify the issue. However, the casino confirmed that the funds had been sent using the wrong blockchain (LTC) and thus, they couldn't assist the player. We suggested the player contact Binance, his e-wallet provider, to see if they could retrieve the funds. Unfortunately, the complaint was rejected as there was nothing more we could have done to assist.

The player from Mexico, who primarily used cryptocurrency, was dissatisfied with the verification requests made by the casino prior to approving his withdrawal request. We found that the casino's terms and conditions did allow them to request identity verification from players. We advised the player to provide the necessary documents to facilitate the withdrawal process. However, the player did not respond to our messages, leading us to conclude the complaint without resolution.

The player from Argentina had been attempting to withdraw his winnings but was repeatedly rejected. The casino advised them to contact Astropay while Astropay directed them back to the casino. All attempted withdrawal amounts had been rejected. The player confirmed that he had passed the KYC verification and had made successful withdrawals in the past. After we reached out to the casino for clarification, the player was finally able to withdraw his funds using cryptocurrency. The issue was then resolved.

The player from Argentina had reported not receiving winnings from two games on the Chicken game, and also claimed that two deposits of $1,000 each were not reflected in her account. She had also mentioned the site was running slow. Despite our team's efforts to resolve the issue, the player was unable to provide the necessary information for verification because she had deleted her account. The player had shown frustration and eventually requested the complaint to be rejected. Due to non-compliance with our and the casino's requests, we had to reject the complaint as it was impossible to resolve.

The player from Argentina had unintentionally activated a bonus on his account, which had hindered him from playing games and withdrawing his deposit of 7500 pesos. Upon his complaint, we had asked him to provide communication records with the casino and information about his account balance. However, the player did not respond to our requests for additional information. Consequently, we were unable to investigate the matter further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom has issues with withdrawing from their account. Initially, the player's account was closed due to a duplicate account. The player then deposited £500 into their second account that was later closed. The casino has refused the refund of the deposit and the player is demanding to reopen their account or pay the pending balance. Account closure was allegedly due to 'not gambling responsibly'. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from the UK had closed an account with Mystake and then opened a new account, which had been approved. However, when the player had attempted to withdraw £2000, Mystake had confiscated the winnings, claiming the player had duplicate accounts. The player stated that he closed his first account due to excessive use and opened a new one after failing to receive a response from Mystake. We ended up rejecting the complaint because the player stopped responding.

The player from the United Kingdom had reported that £2800 in deposits had been made from his card to the casino without his approval. The player's brother, who had a known gambling issue, had used the card to gamble. Despite having reached out to the casino, the player had received no response. The Complaints Team had investigated the situation and found that the casino's terms and conditions clearly stated that third-party payments were not accepted and it was the player's responsibility to use only allowed payment methods. Given that the player had willingly shared his card with his brother, the team concluded they couldn't help further and had rejected the complaint.

The player from Netherlands had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting his complaint. His money hadn't been received yet. He had expressed concern over a delayed withdrawal of 5049 euros, despite previous smaller withdrawals having been processed swiftly. He also noted a change in the casino's customer service response. After three days with no resolution or communication from the casino, the player reported that his issue had been resolved. We had subsequently marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Argentina had accidentally activated a bonus of 2626 ARS and was unable to place bets. They had requested for the bonus to be cancelled so they could continue playing. However, despite our efforts to reach out and gather more information, the player did not respond. As a result, we couldn't investigate the issue further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the United Kingdom had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, he hadn't received his payout at that time. The Complaints Team had advised him that withdrawal processing might take some time, possibly due to unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. They had suggested waiting at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before submitting a complaint. However, the player later confirmed that the issue was resolved and he had received his funds. The complaint was subsequently marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

A player from the UK, who self-excluded from all online casinos due to a gambling addiction, found himself able to play and deposit funds on mystake despite requesting account closure. He's raising concerns over the casino's commitment to responsible gambling. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from the UK, who was a self-excluded gamstop user, had deposited £725 into an unlicensed casino in the UK and lost all the money. He had requested a refund. The issue was complicated by the fact that the casino was licensed in Curaçao, not the UK. We had asked the player if he had informed the casino about his gambling problem prior to making deposits. However, the player did not respond to our queries, and we were unable to investigate further. Consequently, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Argentina had deposited 1000 ARS via Mercado Pago at Mystake Casino, however, the deposit was not reflected in his casino account despite having been deducted from his bank account. The complaint was left open for a month for updates, but due to the player's lack of response, we had to reject the complaint.

A player from United Kingdom seeking refund of £1500 which he deposited into a second account at Mystake Casino. The player had closed his first account due to severe gambling problems and opened a new account under new email, which he believes should not have been allowed by the casino. Account was not instantly blocked after verification process. The complaint was closed as the player stopped responding.

The player from the United Kingdom had closed his old account with MyStake Casino and opened a new one, depositing £382 over 4 days. When he tried to withdraw his winnings, he was informed that he couldn't due to the account being a duplicate. He had requested a refund of his deposits but was initially offered only his last deposit of £100. The casino had honored the full amount. The player had confirmed the resolution and asked for the case to be closed.

A player from Argentina is facing difficulty with withdrawing 5000 ARS through his linked Skrill account. His withdrawal request was rejected after 12 hours. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from the United Kingdom had made three separate deposits totalling £80. The funds had been deducted from their bank account but were not reflected in their casino account. This wasn't the player's first deposit, with previous transactions having been processed successfully. The player had failed to respond to our queries for further information, which led us to close the complaint due to lack of communication. The issue remained unresolved due to the player's non-responsiveness.

The player from Argentina had accidentally activated a bonus, which then prevented him from playing or withdrawing his funds. He wanted the bonus cancelled as he didn't place sports bets, which was the intention of the bonus. When advised by the Complaints Team to contact the casino first, the player didn't respond. As a result, we couldn't investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Italy is experiencing difficulties withdrawing a substantial amount from MyStake Casino. Despite providing all the requested information, and having a verified account, the transaction is continuously rejected. This process has been ongoing for a week. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Argentina unintentionally claimed a bonus of $2,450 after depositing $7,000, which has restricted their abilities to withdraw their deposit and play minigames. They're requesting support to cancel the unintended bonus claim. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Argentina had deposited money into the casino with the intention to play but was instead given a sports bonus which they had not opted for. They had been seeking a refund or to have the bonus removed. We had advised the player to contact the casino's support to cancel the bonus, as per the terms and conditions of the bonus. However, the player did not respond to our messages and we were unable to further investigate the issue. As a result, the complaint was rejected.

The player from the United Kingdom had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hadn't been received yet. The player had reported confusion about the withdrawal process, stating that the system had initiated the withdrawal, not them. The Complaints Team had extended the response time by 7 days, but the player failed to respond. As a result, we were not able to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina is having difficulty withdrawing money and playing slots after accepting a bonus from mystake. The issue is urgent and the player is looking for a solution. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from Ontario had faced an issue with a blocked account after successfully depositing money, earning CAD 1,000, and verifying ID. This had happened right after the withdrawal of winnings. The casino representative had claimed the player had created two accounts and submitted falsified documents, which was against their terms and conditions. Therefore, they had decided to block the account and freeze the current balance. The Complaints Team had asked the casino to provide evidence to support their claims. After reviewing the evidence provided by the casino, it was concluded that the player had forged the documents as the date of birth differed. As a result, the player's complaint had been rejected.