Pledoo Casino Review

The Irish player claims the casino has strict withdrawal limits and misleading bonus terms. After managing to win 17k with a bonus, their winnings were reduced to 2.2k due to a rule restricting the maximum win to 10x the amount of the bonus received. After gathering more information from the player, the player confirmed he received 1 000€ winnings and played down the rest. Since we find maximum win limits for bonus play acceptable, we rejected his complaint.

The player from Switzerland had raised concern over the inability to self-exclude or set limits on his casino account. The casino only offered a 7-day cooling-off period and exhibited poor customer service, failing to respond to emails. The player had already sent an email to the casino requesting self-exclusion, and after the complaint was raised, he received an email confirming the permanent closure of his account and asked for the complaint to be closed. We obliged.

The player from Sweden, who had been previously suspended from BetItAll.com due to gambling problems, had requested a refund of her deposits totaling 515 euros from Pledoo.com. She had alleged that the casino was violating responsible gambling principles by not responding and allowing her to continue playing. After reviewing the provided documents and the casino's terms and conditions, we determined that the casino had taken prompt action to block the player's account upon learning about her gambling issues. We also noted that a previous self-exclusion from a different casino did not automatically apply to other casinos. Therefore, we concluded that the complaint was unjustified. Despite extending the response time by 7 days, the player did not provide any additional information that could have changed this conclusion, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Greece alleged that the casino had allowed him to win €1,024 initially, but he had subsequently lost this amount and more. He believed that the casino manipulated players into thinking they could win. We informed the player that we could not build a case solely on his claims, and that winning and losing was part of the nature of casino games. We requested more information to substantiate his allegations, but the player did not respond. Consequently, we could not investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Switzerland is dubious about the casino's promise to assist in obtaining a refund of over 6000 Euros and has not received any correspondence after providing requested credit card statements. The player stopped responding to our questions and comments, so we rejected the complaint.

The player from Montenegro claims Pledoo Casino blocked his account and confiscated his winnings of 8,600 Eur after he won, despite him proving his residency. He argues the Casino incorrectly labeled him as a Latvian resident. The casino responded and explained that the player had not provided sufficient documentation to prove their residency in Montenegro. After discussing the case with the casino, it was decided the player should be allowed the opportunity to provide further documents and complete the verification process. Upon doing so, the player received their withdrawal and the complaint was resolved.

The player from Saxony-Anhalt is experiencing issues with two withdrawals of 1000€ each, intended for a Master Card. Despite the account being fully verified and the casino receiving a requested photo of the credit card with a visible CVC, they refuse to process the payment without explanation. The complaint was resolved as the player received his payout.

The player from Greece had their account closed and winnings confiscated after a big win, due to a supposed incorrect surname input during registration. The player insists all provided details were correct, and had previously successfully withdrawn smaller winnings. We closed the complaint as resolved since the casino reconsidered its position and decided to unblock the player's account. This was followed by a successful verification of the player. The player then requested a withdrawal and confirmed receipt of the payment.

The player from Germany is having difficulty withdrawing winnings of 3000 euros from Pledoo Casino. Despite her account being fully verified and having successfully made several payments and deposits before, the casino is now requesting bank statements from the player’s Astropay e-wallet for further verification. Atough it seems the issue with verification was resolved, we rejected the complaint because the player stopped responding.

The player from Finland requested a withdrawal. The casino noticed a discrepancy between the information in the player's profile and the documents provided for verification. The player explains the discrepancy as a simple typo. The player confirmed the issue was resolved.

The player from Spain was refunded deposits he made to the casino, which weren't processed due to payment provider's error. The player confirmed the refund was successful. We closed the complaint as rejected since the issue didn't constitute a valid complaint against the casino.

The player from Portugal requested their account to be blocked due to losses, but the casino informed them about 250 free spins in a game. After using up the free spins and making a new deposit, the casino unexpectedly blocked the player's account without their confirmation or consent. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Greece has been struggling for five days to withdraw their money from the casino. The bank rejects their withdrawal request and the customer is advised to use alternative methods such as Neteller and Skrill. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Bulgaria had his account blocked due to accusations of providing inaccurate personal information. Upon discussing and reviewing the situation with the casino, it was decided that the player gained their winnings fairly and that the missing information could be a genuine mistake. The casino decided to allow the player to verify their address and withdraw their winnings, so the complaint was resolved.

The player from Portugal has made a mistake in his address while registering new account. Unfortunately, the withdrawal is now pending due to incomplete verification. Upon discussing and reviewing the situation with the casino, it was decided that the player gained their winnings fairly and that the missing information could be a genuine mistake. The casino decided to allow the player to verify their address and withdraw their winnings, so the complaint was resolved.

The player from Germany was accused of using the "delayed rounds" strategy. The casino provided detailed evidence supporting its claims. We ended up rejecting the complaint as the evidence suggested that the player gained an unfair advantage.

The player from Austria has been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hasn’t been received yet. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Bulgaria has been blocked after an attempt to withdraw her winnings to someone else's payment method. We rejected the complaint because the player breached multiple rules of online gambling. Not only two people were using one account, but two accounts were created using the same personal details, and the same payment method was used to deposit to both accounts.

The player from Croatia was charged a fee from the payment processor of the casino. The issue seemed to be resolved but the issue occurred once more. We ended up rejecting the complaint because the player couldn't prove that the casino was the receiver of the transaction.

The player from Switzerland has requested a self-exclusion. Unfortunately, he was later forced to re-enter his casino account to withdraw winnings. Instead of withdrawing the remaining funds, all of them were played and lost. After a closer examination, we ended up rejecting this complaint as unjustified.

The player from Sweden has submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Malta requested a withdrawal one week prior to submitting this complaint. It has not been processed yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Ireland made a mistake in the first line of their address while registering an account. Unfortunately, their withdrawal has now been canceled and the account is blocked due to incomplete verification. The casino responded and stated that there were a number of details entered incorrectly, and so they would like the player to complete a video verification call. The player was informed of this, but then stopped responding to our questions. Consequently, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Sweden is experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to ongoing verification. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Slovenia has been accused of breaching bonus terms by placing bets greater than the allowed ones. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player was able to play a restricted game and lost his money due to it, requesting a refund. The complaint has been rejected due to the fact the player obtained an advantage by playing the game and he had a chance to win. His funds were legitimately lost by playing and he is not entitled to a refund.

The player's request to close his account is ignored for over a month. It seems there was some confusion regarding translation of the player's request and upon re-examining the case the casino decided to return the player's deposit.

The player from Finland is questioning responsible gambling tools. He asked the casino to activate a deposit limit, however, the casino informed him, that such an option is not available. Since such tools are not mandatory, we decided to reject this complaint.

The player from Austria has received free spins. While he’s been playing, the casino blocked the account as per the previous request. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Germany complained about a delayed withdrawal of 3000 Euros that he had requested on August 21, 2024, which remained unaccounted for despite being marked as "Completed" on the casino's website. He had received insufficient communication regarding the status of his withdrawal and expressed frustration over the lack of transparency and accountability from the support team. The issue was resolved when the support team, particularly an employee named L.K., facilitated the arrival of the funds into his bank account. The player confirmed that the money had been received, leading to the complaint being marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from Canada had made a withdrawal request more than two weeks ago that hadn't been processed. Despite having made deposits through Interac, he had been asked to provide a bank account number for the withdrawal. His account had already been verified and this had been his first withdrawal attempt at the casino. The player eventually received the funds. The delay was attributed to incorrect email and banking details initially provided by the player. After necessary corrections were made, the withdrawal was processed correctly and the player confirmed receipt of his funds. We then marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Finland had reported issues with double charges on his deposits at an online casino. He had made two deposits using a Visa card but was charged four times, with each deposit appearing as identical doubles. Despite his request for a full transaction history to clarify the situation, the casino did not respond. The player had demanded a refund for the extra charges. Eventually, the casino refunded the disputed amount. The issue was thus resolved.

The player from Austria had faced difficulties receiving a payout from the casino, despite verification. The casino had blamed the player's bank, but the player had verified this claim with his bank and found it to be untrue. However, the issue had been successfully resolved as the player had confirmed the receipt of his money. Consequently, we had closed the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Austria had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hadn't been received yet. The player confirmed that they were fully verified on the casino website. After some time, the player informed that two withdrawals had been approved and processed, and they expected the rest of the money to be withdrawn in 1-2 days. Finally, the player confirmed that all their money had arrived, although they were still locked out from sports betting. As a result, we marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Austria 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 Switzerland is experiencing difficulties withdrawing her funds due to limited availability of payment methods. After our intervention, we were able to help the player to get their winnings. The player confirmed they received the funds in the end. The Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Russia had their account suspended and winnings confiscated due to unsuccessful KYC verification. The player only indicated the name of his region instead of his street and house number when filling out the 'Address' field in their player profile. Our position was that an incorrectly filled out address alone is not a sufficient reason to void winnings. The casino complied with our ruling and initiated additional account verification. The player successfully passed the verification process and received their funds shortly afterwards. The complaint was closed as 'Resolved'.

The player from Kazakhstan attempted to withdraw €200 but faced issues due to a supposed chargeback request for a previous deposit of €450, which he had not initiated. Despite having provided extensive evidence from his bank confirming that the transaction was completed and that no chargeback was requested, the casino did not acknowledge his explanations and refused to provide proof of the chargeback. Later, the casino accepted the evidence provided by the player, explained the situation, and removed the restrictions from his account. The issue was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Spain requested a withdrawal that was approved within minutes but did not receive the funds. Despite verifying the account and payment methods, the casino only claimed the withdrawals had been sent without providing any proof. The Complaints Team advised the player to wait 14 days for the withdrawal to process. The player later confirmed that the issue was resolved, and the complaint was closed as 'resolved'.

The player from Spain had requested a withdrawal of 5,268 euros, which was returned to his gaming account without explanation. After he contacted the casino for clarification and sought to recover his funds. The Complaints Team contacted the casino, which provided the necessary details. The player confirmed that the issue was resolved.

The player from Serbia faced account blockage and a request for video verification in English via Skype when attempting to withdraw money. He did not speak English and found this requirement discriminatory. He questioned the legality of using Skype for identity verification. After raising the issue, the player underwent the video verification and subsequently reported that his account was unblocked and the withdrawal was completed successfully. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Switzerland faced issues with the casino RoySpins regarding a Spinomenal tournament, where the rules were changed mid-event, resulting in a significant loss of potential winnings. Originally, the player was set to receive €40,000 according to the initial terms, but after the changes, their points were drastically reduced, and the casino had not paid the winnings after nearly a week of waiting. The issue was resolved as the casino confirmed that a technical glitch had led to the discrepancy and paid out the full €40,000 as initially anticipated, along with an additional €3,000 as compensation for the delay. The player confirmed receipt of the winnings, and the complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Finland reported that their withdrawal from Royspins was initially processed but then later reverted, with the bank indicating a failure from the casino's end. Despite having transaction codes, the casino refused to investigate further without a PDF bank statement, which did not contain the relevant information. The issue was resolved when the player confirmed receiving the payment, leading to the complaint being marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from Poland had successfully withdrawn 2,000 euros from their winnings of 16,000 euros, but the remaining funds were blocked. Despite completing additional verification and being informed that their winnings were fair, he received a refund of his deposits instead of his winnings. The issue was resolved when the casino ultimately paid out the remaining funds.

The player from Spain closed his account due to gambling addiction, but the casino did not return the balance amount and was unresponsive to emails and chat messages. The player reported that his account had been closed with a balance of approximately €130, and despite the casino claiming to have sent the money, he had not received it. The Complaints Team extended the investigation period but ultimately rejected the complaint due to a lack of response from the player. However, the player later confirmed that the money had arrived from the casino, leading to the resolution of the issue.

The player from Brazil requested to permanently block his account, but the casino only offered temporary blocks and lacked responsible gaming options. We advised the player to clearly state the reason and duration for self-exclusion in an email to the casino. The player confirmed that the account was successfully blocked. The complaint was then marked as resolved.

The player from North Rhine-Westphalia had made a €91 deposit at Roy Spins Casino which had not been credited to his account despite evidence of a successful transaction. The player had reported unsatisfactory responses from the casino. We had advised the player to contact his bank and wait for a month as the investigation of the transaction could take time. The casino had stated they were unable to locate the deposit due to an exceptionally rare instance of a transaction getting stuck between the player's bank and their third-party payment provider. The casino had provided the player with instructions to reclaim his funds through his bank and compensated him for the inconvenience. After almost 3 months, the player confirmed he had received his deposit back. Consequently, the complaint was marked as 'resolved'.

The player from Portugal, who was struggling with gambling addiction, had requested self-exclusion from RoySpins online casino. Despite this, the casino had allowed him to create multiple accounts and deposit over 3000€. The player had reported losing all his bets and had continued to receive promotional messages from the casino, despite his self-exclusion. After a prolonged discussion with the casino and the complaints team, the casino had initially refunded 3000€ to the player. The player had insisted that the total loss was 6000€, and after further negotiations, the casino had agreed to refund an additional 1000€. The issue had eventually been resolved, and the player had acknowledged the resolution.

The player from Finland had requested account closure due to a gambling addiction in May 2023. Despite repeated requests, the closure had not been implemented until September 26, 2023, during which the player had lost several thousand euros. The player had stated that he had specified his gambling addiction as the reason for account closure in all his requests. The casino had claimed they did not receive the player's email requesting account closure until September 26, 2023. The player had disputed an amount of 1160 euros, but the casino had agreed to refund only 244 euros, which was the total deposit made after August 3, 2023. The player accepted the partial refund due to insufficient evidence, resulting in the case being marked as resolved.