PalmSlots Casino Review

The player from Germany had requested self-exclusion on 24.06.2024 due to gambling addiction but received no response and continued to deposit €2,180. He then demanded a refund for the amount deposited since the self-exclusion request. The complaint was rejected because the player did not make any deposits on the day his account was closed (28.06.2024) and the casino followed its stated timeframe for processing self-exclusion requests.

The player from British Columbia had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings hadn't been received yet. The player claimed her account was verified and previous withdrawals were processed within 24 hours. She reported no response from the payment department despite multiple inquiries and alleged her winnings were confiscated due to supposed bonus manipulation. We were unable to investigate further, and the complaint was rejected due to the player's lack of response.

The player from Germany discovered that his casino account had been locked when he attempted to withdraw his balance. He stated that his account had been verified and his winnings were earned with real money. He suspected his account was closed because he had requested deactivation a few days earlier, which had not happened immediately. We were unable to investigate further, and the complaint was rejected due to a lack of response from the player.

The player from Germany struggled with a gambling addiction and had repeatedly requested account closure, all while continuing to make deposits. The casino persistently offered bonuses and VIP offers rather than acknowledging the player's self-exclusion request. Hence, the player expected his account to be permanently closed and demanded compensation for the money lost since the day of the first closure request. The Complaints Team determined that the self-exclusion process was delayed due to the player's lack of cooperation in providing necessary verification documents. Consequently, the complaint was rejected, and no refund was granted.

The player from Germany had requested a permanent account closure with PalmSlots Casino due to a gambling problem. Despite this, the casino had reopened her account, in which she subsequently lost €4,999.60. The player had asked for a full refund from the casino but had not received a response. After mediation, the casino agreed to refund the disputed amount as a gesture of goodwill and confirmed that the account would be permanently excluded. The player acknowledged receiving the refund and expressed gratitude for the resolution.

The player from Canada requested account closure due to gambling addiction on March 26th, 2024, but the account remained active, causing the player to lose more money. The player sought a refund for the deposits made after the date of the closure request. The casino asserted that the player did not follow the correct procedure for self-exclusion and did not respond to their instructions. The player claimed multiple attempts were made without any response from the casino. The complaint was rejected by us due to the player's lack of response to further questions, preventing further investigation.

The player from Germany had requested PalmSlots to close his account due to gambling addiction several times, but the account had remained active. He had also sought a refund for his deposits made between the dates of his self-exclusion request and the actual account closure. The casino, however, had argued that the self-exclusion procedure was completed within a reasonable amount of time and that any account activity during the pending self-exclusion period was the player's responsibility. The player had provided evidence of his deposits during this period. After reviewing all the information, we had concluded that the casino had acted within its rights and the self-exclusion procedure was completed in a reasonable timeframe. Hence, no refund was due to the player. The complaint was subsequently rejected.

The player from Germany had a pending withdrawal at the casino that had not been processed for over 24 hours, which he found unusual. After passing the casino's KYC verification, his withdrawal got rejected due to unfulfilled wagering requirements. Despite his efforts to meet the requirements, the player lost his balance. We had confirmed that the casino's terms and conditions stipulated the need for wagering deposited funds at least 5 times before withdrawal. As the player lost his balance while attempting to fulfill these requirements, we were unable to provide further assistance. The complaint had been closed.

The player from Ireland had trouble withdrawing €1,900 from PalmSlots. Despite having verified his account, he had lost the two cards used for deposit and could not validate a virtual card. His bank was unable to provide the card statements that customer support requested. He had tried other verification methods but received no response from the casino. We had requested additional information from the player to assist with the investigation but received no response. Consequently, we had to reject the complaint due to the lack of communication from the player, which prevented us from conducting a thorough investigation or providing potential solutions.

The player from Alberta had deposited CAD 20 into an online casino, expecting to receive a bonus of 100 spins as per a promotional email. However, the bonus was not granted as the deposit was not in Euro. Despite having used the correct promo code and leaving her deposit untouched, the casino's live chat representative had refused her request for a refund. The player decided to withdraw her complaint and expressed her dissatisfaction with online casinos, opting for physical gambling venues instead. Consequently, we had closed the complaint as per her request.

The player from Finland had experienced a delayed €5000 withdrawal from Palm Slots casino despite having a verified account. He had reported dissatisfaction with generic chat responses and had expressed concerns about the casino's legitimacy. The winnings had been accumulated from a VIP bonus, and the account had been verified earlier in 2022. The Complaints Team had advised the player to wait the recommended 14 days for the payout to be processed. The player later confirmed that the issue had been resolved.

The player from Germany had deposited €100 into the Palmslot casino using online banking, but the funds were not credited to his casino account despite the transaction being marked as 'pending'. The player had contacted the casino's support chat three times, but only received advice to wait and had not received any email confirmation from the casino. The player had threatened to file a criminal complaint for fraud against the casino's payment provider, NEW ERA CYPRUS LIMITED. Despite having VIP status at the casino, he had received no assistance from his personal VIP manager. We had advised the player to forward the payment confirmation from their provider to the casino and wait for up to a month for the missing deposit to be credited. The player later confirmed that the issue had been resolved and the money was credited to his casino account.

The player from Slovenia had requested a withdrawal but had not received her winnings. The Complaints Team had advised her to wait at least 14 days post withdrawal request, as delays could occur due to KYC verification or high withdrawal request volumes. The team had extended the response time by 7 days, but the player did not respond. As a result, we had to reject the complaint due to lack of further information.

The player from Quebec had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, her payout hadn't been received yet. The Complaints Team had advised her that it was common for withdrawals to take some time to process, possibly due to unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. They had suggested she wait at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before submitting a complaint. However, the issue had been resolved successfully, and the player confirmed receipt of her winnings. The complaint was subsequently marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from Austria had been waiting for over a month for his withdrawal to be processed by the casino. The Complaints Team had attempted to investigate the issue, asking for further clarification on a bonus mentioned by the casino. However, the player did not respond to the team's inquiries, leading to the complaint being rejected due to lack of further information.

The player from Germany had attempted his first withdrawal but faced issues. He had completed the KYC verification and asserted that his IBAN was correct. However, due to difficulties with withdrawal, he ended up losing his winnings. Despite the player's situation, we concluded that as the player was solely responsible for their account, active balance, and all bets, we could not ask the casino to refund the lost winnings. As a result, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Tunisia had won $2,000 at PalmSlots Casino and had been waiting for a week for the withdrawal to process. Despite his loyalty, he had received no updates or communication from the support team. We had advised the player that withdrawal processes could take up to 14 days and suggested waiting for this period before submitting a complaint. However, due to the lack of response from the player to our messages and inquiries, we were unable to proceed with further investigation or provide potential solutions. The complaint was subsequently rejected.

The player from Germany had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks but had not received her payout yet. We had advised her that withdrawals could take some time to process and asked her to wait at least 14 days before submitting a complaint. We also extended the timer for her response by 7 days. However, she did not respond to our messages and questions, which prevented us from investigating further. Therefore, we had to reject the complaint.

The player from Estonia had requested a permanent closure of his account from Palmslots Casino and a refund of his deposits. His account had been verified on July 21, 2023, and was closed on September 5, 2023. Despite multiple inquiries to customer service, the refund had not been processed even after two months. The player had claimed to have requested self-exclusion via live chat but did not have any screenshots of the conversation. We had asked Palmslots Casino to clarify the situation. The casino had confirmed that no funds were left in the player's account at the time of self-exclusion and no deposits were made afterwards. The player admitted he was unsure if any funds were left in his account when it was closed. We explained that the casino was not obliged to refund any money spent during the time it was unaware of his gambling problem. The complaint was rejected as the casino had acted correctly.

The player from Canada had been waiting for ten days for the casino to process their winnings. The casino had only offered general apologies in response to their inquiries. The player had claimed that PalmSlots Casino confiscated his $400 winnings, accusing him of violating betting limits. He had denied this accusation and insisted he was owed $350, as the casino had only returned his initial $50 deposit. However, despite our repeated requests for additional information and evidence to support his claims, the player did not respond. Consequently, we were compelled to reject the complaint due to lack of communication from the player's side.

The player from Estonia had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, her payout hadn't been received yet. She reported that her account was fully verified and there were conflicting responses from the casino's live chat and her account manager regarding the delay. After our team's intervention, she confirmed that she had received her withdrawal. We had subsequently marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from Thailand had requested a withdrawal of 675 euros from the online casino, following her initial deposit and bonus clearance. Despite having passed the KYC verification and repeatedly contacting the casino's support, she had only received vague responses. We had attempted to investigate the issue, asking for any relevant communication between the player and the casino. However, the player did not respond to our messages, which forced us to reject the complaint due to lack of information.

The player from Brazil had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, her winnings had not been received yet. The player claimed her account had already been verified and she had been waiting for her winnings for over 17 days. The player also mentioned that she had been blocked from the casino's chat. The casino had accused the player of breaching multiple bonus terms, which the player denied. We had asked the player to provide her game history as evidence, but she failed to do so. As a result, due to lack of evidence, we were unable to support the player further and had to close the complaint.

The player from Slovenia has struggled with a cashout delay of 8 days. The casino responds with generic messages, indicating high financial traffic. The player later informed us that he received his winnings, so this complaint was closed as resolved.

The player from Estonia requested a withdrawal of 3000 euros and submitted the required KYC documents. Despite contacting the casino support and KYC team, a week has passed without any progress or response to her withdrawal request. The player is growing increasingly concerned and seeks advice on the next steps. The complaint was resolved as the player got paid out.

The player from Austria has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The player later confirmed that he received his winnings, so the complaint could be closed as resolved.

The player from Germany has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The player later informed us that he stopped playing at this casino and requested the complaint to be closed.

The player from Austria is experiencing a complex verification process in order to withdraw their 5000 Euro winnings. The casino keeps asking for additional documents beyond the usual requirements. The complaint was resolved as the player received his money.

The player from Italy requested self-exclusion but continues to receive promotional emails. Despite additional requests for account closure, the casino continues to send offers and entice the player back, resulting in more money lost. The player's communication with customer service and the VIP manager has been unanswered. Since the player did not explicitly stated that she wished to close her account due to gambling addiction, we had to reject this complaint.

An Austrian player deposited 10 Euros through express transfer. However, the balance was not displayed and despite numerous inquires, she received no response from the casino. The player confirmed the deposit was credited on 6th day after making the transfer.

The player from Germany requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The casino later informed the player that his winnings were confiscated because he breached the maximum allowed bet. We were forced to reject this complaint because the casino acted in compliance with their bonus T&Cs.

The player from Germany won 700 euros after depositing 50 euros and fulfilling bonus conditions. However, despite verification and observing betting rules, the casino accused the player of betting manipulation and canceled the winnings. The player later confirmed that the funds were returned after the casino investigated the case again.

The player from Poland successfully won and tried to withdraw €2.5k from Palmslots Casino. Despite sending all requested KYC documents and following up multiple times, the player has not received a response. The player confirmed the issue was resolved.

The player from Finland deposited 20 euros and received free spins. After other deposits and wins of around 2000 euros could not be withdrawn, the winnings suddenly dropped to about 50 euros. Casino cited unfinished free spins and subsequent deposits being treated as bonus money as the reason. We ended up closing the case as resolved since the casino decided to reinstate the player's winnings that had been successfully withdrawn to the player's bank afterwards.

The player from British Columbia has been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hasn’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Portugal is questioning bonus wagering requirements. Even if we assumed that the issue has been resolved, without a confirmation from the player, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from Germany has requested a withdrawal nine days prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Germany experienced a technical problem while playing a specific slot machine. We ended up rejecting the complaint because the casino let the player finish the wagering of the bonus with unchanged conditions.

The player from Germany had his bonus winnings canceled due to a bonus rules violation. The casino provided evidence suggesting that the player used a loophole in a game to easily transfer bonus balance into real money to avoid the wagering requirements. The complaint was rejected.

The player from Spain has been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hasn’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

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

The player from South Africa has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, their winnings haven’t been received yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from the United Kingdom had successfully completed the verification process but faced issues with withdrawing his winnings, as the casino refused to pay him. The Complaints Team clarified that delays in withdrawal processing were common and advised patience. The issue was marked as resolved after the player confirmed that the matter had been addressed satisfactorily.

The player from Japan faced a complaint regarding the unjust reduction of his balance after using a casino bonus. After wagering, his winnings were reduced from €270 to €30 due to a policy that limited free spins (fs) winnings, which he believed was unfair. He was also concerned about an impending expiration of an anniversary bonus as he waited for resolution. The issue was resolved when the casino acknowledged an error in the deduction of €245.20, which was then credited back to the player's account, allowing him to withdraw his funds.

The player from the United Kingdom had deposited €900 to Rollino but decided not to gamble due to previous gambling issues. She requested a refund of the deposit back to her payment method but was only given the option to withdraw via cryptocurrency, which she was unfamiliar with and had not used for the deposit. It was confirmed that Rollino allowed her to withdraw her deposit to crypto without having to wager. The issue was resolved when she confirmed that Rollino had permitted her to withdraw her unused deposit, leading to the complaint being marked as resolved.

The player from Austria had sent multiple requests to Rollino Casino to close their account, but it remained active. The player expressed dissatisfaction with the casino and requested account closure due to a negative experience. Despite following the recommended procedures, the player's requests were ignored by the casino. Finally, the account was closed without notification. The issue was marked as resolved.

The player from the UK had deposited 500€ at Rollino casino, won money, and had tried to make a max withdrawal of 500€. The casino had cancelled the request, stating the player hadn't met the stake requirement. After further gameplay, the stake count had remained inconsistently low. The player had also expressed frustration at the max withdrawal limit of 500€. After our intervention, the player had managed to withdraw 1000€ in two transactions and requested the remaining 223€. Eventually, the player confirmed the complete withdrawal of her balance. The issue had been successfully resolved, and the complaint was marked as 'resolved'.

The player from Canada, who had had issues with the casino blocking her account and confiscating $4,500 in winnings due to alleged terms and conditions violation, confirmed that she had received all her winnings. The casino had blocked her from playing any games, but she had expressed relief that the issue was over. We, the Complaints Team, had appreciated the casino's fair approach and their efforts to ensure the winnings were paid out as quickly as possible. We had then marked this complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Italy had tried to close his account due to a self-identified gambling issue, but hadn't received a response from the casino. After he contacted the Complaints Team, they had advised him to send another email to the casino regarding his self-exclusion request. The casino had responded by confirming that his account would remain open until the completion of KYC verification and withdrawal of his winnings. The casino had also set a bet limit on his account as a precautionary measure. After some correspondence regarding withdrawal processes and limits, the player had confirmed receiving his winnings and the closure of his account. The Complaints Team then marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from Ontario had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings hadn't been obtained up to that day. The delay had been due to a technical issue that caused the initial transaction to expire. After the player's KYC verification was successfully completed, the casino asked him to repeat the withdrawal request. The casino confirmed that the withdrawal of Can$300 was successfully completed. The player confirmed that the issue had been resolved.

The player from the United Kingdom had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting his complaint. Unfortunately, his winnings hadn't been received yet. The player's issue had been with the casino imposing unfair withdrawal requirements and restrictions, which prevented him from submitting his next withdrawal request. The casino eventually acknowledged that this was a mistake and promised to process the player's withdrawal. The player also had concerns about the casino's withdrawal limits, which he felt were unfair and made withdrawing winnings difficult. However, the Complaints Team explained that many online casinos had withdrawal limits and they didn't consider it a problem if they weren't too low and if the casinos followed these limits. The player confirmed that all his withdrawals had now been processed and the issue was resolved successfully.

A player from the UK successfully completed a casino's verification process, but was then only offered Bitcoin as a withdrawal option. Despite not using this cryptocurrency and this not being specified in the T&Cs, the casino insists that she must use it to receive her winnings of £250.

The player from Germany had experienced a delay in the withdrawal process of his winnings from an online casino. Initially, the player had an outstanding withdrawal of €2500, with €1500 already having been transferred. The casino had confirmed that the pending withdrawals were processed within 48 hours and were awaiting a game provider check, as per their terms and conditions. The player later reported that an additional €3000 was ready for payment. The casino responded that out of the initial €2500 withdrawal, €2000 had been received by the player. After the player asked us to close the complaint, the complaint was closed accordingly.

The player from Germany had experienced a problem with a withdrawal limit of 500 Euros at the casino, despite having submitted over 12 documents. The player had requested a payout of over 2,000 Euros, with about 1,600 to 1,700 Euros remaining in the account. The casino had responded that the delay was due to the player sending the documents to the wrong email address. After the player had sent the documents to the correct address, the casino verified them and advised the player to attempt the withdrawal again. The player had confirmed that the issue was resolved and requested for the case to be closed. We had closed the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Greece had issues with the wagering requirements of a bonus they claimed at an online casino. They reported that the casino was not counting their bets towards the completion of these requirements. After an investigation, the casino acknowledged a technical error and recalculated the player's balance, making it fully withdrawable. However, the player encountered another problem with their KYC verification process, where their proof of residence was initially rejected. Upon resubmission, the casino accepted the document and the player was able to withdraw their winnings. The player confirmed the resolution of their complaint.

A player from Germany, despite having a verified profile and submitting all requested documents, has their withdrawal requests cancelled repeatedly. The player is worried the casino is intentionally delaying his payout. The complaint was resolved as the player got paid out.

The player from Greece had a balance of 313 euros, and when he cancelled a bonus, all funds were removed, not just the bonus amount. Eventually, the casino had agreed to credit back the cancelled bonus to the user's account as a compromise. The user had confirmed that he successfully reactivated the bonus and considered the issue resolved.

The player from Spain had requested a withdrawal but despite three days of waiting, the money had not been deposited to their account. Communication with the casino remained unhelpful, with the casino always stating that the withdrawal was still processing. The casino had requested additional verification in the form of a card photo, which the player initially refused to provide citing privacy concerns. However, after eventually complying with the request, the casino confirmed receipt of the necessary information and approved the withdrawal. The player had since confirmed receipt of her winnings, and the issue was now resolved.

The player from Ontario is facing a dispute over her winnings. After completing the wagering requirements of a deposit bonus, she continued playing without an active bonus and won $1400, which was then voided by the casino. She claims that the winnings should not have been affected as there was no active bonus at the time. The complaint was resolved as the casino refunded the money to the player.

The player from Canada had won 600 CAD after making several deposits, but was unable to withdraw his winnings after his account had been closed by the casino due to alleged gambling addiction. The player had denied having any gambling addiction and claimed he had been invited by the casino to play. The casino had explained that the player's account was closed in accordance with CEG regulation due to previous reports of gambling addiction on other brands operated by their license holder, Altacore N.V. However, the casino had assured the player that his balance of 600 CAD would be processed and paid out to him. After some delay and communication issues, the casino had confirmed the transaction had been processed. The player later confirmed receipt of his winnings. Consequently, we had closed the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Germany had requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, her winnings hadn't been received yet. The casino responded that the withdrawal requests were executed and received on her end. The player confirmed that the issue was resolved after a long wait.

The player from Greece had deposited 143€ to Rollino casino via Neteller. The deposit had been confirmed by Neteller but didn't appear in the player's casino account balance. Despite the player providing evidence of the transaction, the casino was still investigating the issue at that time. However, the casino later confirmed that the deposit had been successfully credited to the player's game balance. The player verified that the problem had been resolved. We then marked this complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Japan had his account closed by the casino on grounds of employing a low-risk strategy while using a bonus. He does not believe he violated any explicit rules mentioned in the Terms of Use and feels the casino's decision is arbitrary.

The player from Germany had experienced issues with Rollino Casino, specifically regarding the withdrawal of his winnings. Initially, the player's withdrawal request of €1000 had been reduced to €93.75 due to the casino's bonus rules. The player then used this amount to win €500, which was again reduced due to the same rules. After a series of exchanges between the player, the casino, and our team, the casino had agreed to reissue the second withdrawal request of €500 as a gesture of goodwill. The player confirmed the receipt of this amount and requested the complaint to be marked as resolved. We had then closed this case.

The player from Sweden has requested a withdrawal of €3000 in three parts and completed all verification. However, the player is unable to access the website to confirm if the withdrawal was successful. The player later confirmed all withdrawals were processed, therefore we closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania had been unable to access the Rollino online casino page. She had also had some funds left in her casino account. We had asked her to try contacting the casino's support, and in response, the casino had informed her that they were making adjustments to their main domain. They had provided an alternative domain for the player to access her account. The player had confirmed that she could access her account via the provided link. We had marked the issue as resolved.

The player from Switzerland had initially been unable to use the promo code in the casino. He had claimed to have signed up through a link on Casino Guru's website. The casino acknowledged that the issue had arisen because the player had not entered the promo code during registration. The casino then manually applied the promo code to the player's account, resolving the issue. The player had expressed satisfaction with this solution. We had marked the complaint as resolved.

A player from Italy requested self-exclusion and account closure via email and chat yet the account remains open. After the attempted self-exclusion, she managed to deposit and lose an additional €1600 and has requested a refund. The casino's response is pending. The complaint was resolved as the player's account got closed within a reasonable time frame.

The player from Brazil has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The player later informed us that he received his winnings, so we could close this complaint as resolved.

The player from Austria is having trouble with the verification process as the casino does not accept their valid passport, and the website does not allow for more documents to be uploaded. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Germany had deposited 3050 euros at Jettbet Casino and won over 7740 euros but had requested a withdrawal of only 500 euros. After completing the document verification, his account was blocked with a message citing gambling addiction, which he denied and stated he had never requested the closure. The issue was resolved when the casino apologized, reopened the account, and processed the initial payment of 500 euros. The player was then able to withdraw the remaining winnings in increments of 500 euros, with a total of 3800 euros still outstanding. The complaint was closed as resolved, with the option to reopen it if further issues arose.

The player from Greece had completed the bonus wagering requirements and submitted documents to verify his account, but faced difficulties withdrawing his winnings. Despite requesting withdrawals through different methods and providing proof of deposit, the casino continued to ask for unnecessary personal information and had not processed his withdrawal. The issue was resolved after multiple attempts to verify the withdrawal account, and his winnings were successfully transferred to his bank account. The complaint was marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from Nova Scotia had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting their complaint. They had not received their money yet. The issue was resolved after the player's account verification and communication with the casino, which confirmed that the withdrawal had not been canceled on their end. The resolution indicated that the player was now able to access their winnings.