Royal Ace Casino Review

The player from Wisconsin had encountered multiple obstacles while trying to withdraw $3400, including issues with bitcoin and wire transfer methods, and specific withdrawal criteria. The player also complained about a lack of communication and withdrawal options. Upon investigation, it was revealed that the player's winnings were tied to a credit card deposit, hence the casino insisted on a wire transfer as the withdrawal method. However, the player's bank did not accept international wires. The casino representative had suggested the player open a new bank account that accepts SWIFT transfers. The player did not respond to this suggestion and the complaint was subsequently closed due to lack of response.

The player from the US had utilized the casino's crypto deposit function and expected a bonus that was not added to her account. Despite her attempts to reach out through live chat, she had not received a satisfactory response. The Complaints Team had attempted to gather more information from the player and had extended the response time twice. However, due to the lack of response from the player, we were forced to reject the complaint. The investigation could not be carried out further and no potential solutions could have been provided.

The first-time player from Texas had requested a withdrawal of $482 won from a bonus but had not received the withdrawal after 2 weeks. Despite queries, the reason for the delay was not clear, and he was open to receiving the max withdrawal amount and the rest as game credits. We had asked for additional information to investigate the issue, but the player did not respond. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from South Africa had an issue with a withdrawal and claimed that the casino requested an additional $10 deposit to process the winnings. Upon deposit, the money was reportedly withdrawn by the casino manager. The player claimed that the casino deleted his verified status and was then refusing to acknowledge his deposit. The casino claimed the player's deposit was unsuccessful and they had not received it. The player was unable to provide the requested bank statement to confirm the successful payment, refused to cooperate further and requested the case to be closed.

The player from Nevada had requested a withdrawal of $62 via Bitcoin from Royal Ace casino. However, she did not receive the funds and had no communication from the casino. After we investigated her case, we discovered that the withdrawal had been denied due to the player redeeming multiple no-deposit bonuses without a deposit in between, which was against the casino's terms and conditions. The player's verification deposit had been refunded. As a result, we considered this matter resolved and had rejected the complaint.

The player from Pennsylvania had won a $5500 jackpot and had made multiple withdrawal requests. Her first withdrawal of $1900 via Coindraw had been approved and paid out. However, her subsequent Bitcoin withdrawals had been denied due to alleged mixed funds from a coupon. She had found this unfair as all withdrawals were not considered simultaneously. We had attempted to investigate her claims but the player did not respond to our messages and queries. Therefore, we could not proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from the US had struggled to withdraw winnings from a no-rules bonus. The casino had provided different reasons for delay each week, including an incorrect routing number. After multiple interactions with the casino and her bank, the player had confirmed that her routing number was finally accepted. She had received her first payment after a month and a half, despite the casino's withdrawal limit of $2500 at a time. However, due to her lack of response to further inquiries, we had been forced to reject the case, unable to proceed with any further investigation or provide potential solutions.

The player from the United States had won money using a no-deposit bonus at an online casino. When he tried to withdraw his winnings, the casino had asked him to deposit $10 in Bitcoin to validate his wallet. Despite having made this deposit, the player's wallet validation remained pending and he had not received any further assistance from the casino since January 13. He was then seeking the return of his $10 deposit. Despite our efforts to resolve the issue, the casino claimed they had no record of the player's win or deposit, and the player had not provided the requested evidence of his Bitcoin transaction. As a result, we had to reject the complaint.

The player from Oregon had requested a withdrawal but had faced a delay of over a month, despite the promise of a maximum waiting time of 9 days. The player had made several deposits and withdrawals, but was struggling with a no deposit withdrawal after recent contact with customer support. After the player had submitted his complaint, we asked for more details and contacted the casino. The casino confirmed that payment was issued via Bitcoin. However, we had not received confirmation from the player regarding the receipt of the funds. Therefore, we had closed the complaint as rejected.

The player from Florida had requested a withdrawal of $110, which hadn't been processed yet. Despite having confirmed identity verification and required crypto deposit, and several unanswered emails to the support, the player was still waiting for the withdrawal. The casino had claimed the player violated their terms by using multiple free chips without making a deposit in between, and having multiple linked accounts. The player didn't respond to these claims, and we had to reject the complaint due to lack of further information.

The player from the US claimed that his account had been suspended after he requested a $695 payout. He expressed dissatisfaction and urged action against the casino. After we reached out to the player for additional information necessary for the investigation, there was no response from the player's side. Therefore, we had to reject the complaint due to the lack of cooperation from the player, which prevented further investigation into the issue.

The player from Austria had played no deposit bonus on multiple RTG casinos. After account verification and making a deposit, she had started a withdrawal process. Following her withdrawal request, she had been unable to access the site and hadn't received any communications regarding this issue. After a series of communications with the casino and the player, it was discovered that the player's account had been deactivated due to being linked to multiple other casino accounts used for redeeming and playing free chips, which was against the casino's terms and conditions. Consequently, the Complaints Team had rejected the complaint.

The player from Japan had difficulty with KYC verification because ID cards in Japanese were not supported by the Hooyu system. The player had contacted the document team but hadn't received a response. After discussing the issue with the Complaints Team, the casino's representative suggested a manual review of documents. However, the casino later requested an internationally recognized ID (passport), which the player didn't possess. Consequently, the player decided to stop pursuing the issue, resulting in the complaint being closed.

The player from Alabama had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hadn’t been received at that time. The Complaints Team had advised the player to wait at least 14 days after requesting their withdrawal before submitting a complaint. After two weeks, the player confirmed that he had received his payout of $50, which was the maximum payout for the no deposit bonus he had used. The issue had been resolved successfully and the complaint had been marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from France had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks before submitting this complaint. The payment hadn't been processed yet. The Complaints Team had advised the player that withdrawal processing could take up to two weeks and suggested waiting for this period before filing a complaint. They also mentioned potential reasons for the delay, such as unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. The team tried to follow up with the player, but due to a lack of response, they were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Virginia 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 to wait at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before submitting a complaint, considering the usual processing time. The team had also extended the timer for her response twice. However, due to the lack of response from the player to further inquiries about her withdrawal status and KYC verification, the complaint had been rejected.

The player from Arizona submitted a withdrawal request on September 26, which was approved on October 12, but has yet to receive the funds. He also mentioned that the chat option is no longer available upon login. Player stopped responding to our question therefore the complaint was rejected.

The player from the United States requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting the complaint. His money hadn't been received yet. The Complaints Team had advised the player that withdrawals could take some time to process and that a delay might have been due to unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. The player had been asked to wait at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal before submitting a complaint. However, the player did not respond to further inquiries, leading to the rejection of the complaint due to insufficient information.

The player from Mexico had attempted to withdraw his winnings from exchanged points, but the casino had claimed these points were not eligible for withdrawal. After the issue had been raised with the casino, they had clarified that the funds should indeed have been valid for withdrawal. The only issue had been an update needed for the player's Bitcoin address. Once the player had confirmed his payout details, the casino had approved the withdrawal and submitted it for priority payment. The casino later confirmed that the payment had been completed. However, without a confirmation from the player, we had to reject the complaint.

The player from Texas has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The payment hasn’t been processed yet. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from the United States is having issues with login and withdrawal. After a deposit of $125, a software glitch prevented the player from accessing the game. Despite multiple password resets and emails to the support, the issue persists. Additionally, the casino has not processed a pending withdrawal of winnings worth $2500 despite numerous document submissions. The player later informed us that her winnings have been paid, so we closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from the US is experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings from the casino, due to minimum withdrawal limit. We closed the complaint because the player didn't reply to our messages and questions.

The player from Mexico was experiencing difficulties with a withdrawal from the casino. We contacted the casino and its representative informed us that some documents for the KYC were missing. The player informed us that the documents were improved, but the withdrawal request was under review. The casino informed us that the player was paid eligible for $100 for playing with free chip, which was paid out but the player stopped answering our questions therefore the complaint was finally rejected.

The player from the United States had his tournament winnings canceled. He had participated in several free roll tournaments, winning on multiple occasions. However, the casino claimed that the player had breached the tournament rules by using his winnings from a free tournament for add-ons in another tournament. The player had maintained that he had followed all rules and completed the required 1x rollover, which should have made his winnings withdrawable. Upon further investigation, it became clear that the decision to void the player's tournament wins wasn't entirely warranted. The casino decided to pay the player. However, since there were multiple tournament wins in question and calculating the amount the player was eligible for, according to the rules of tournaments, was hard to determine, the player questioned the calculation. After extensive discussions regarding the amount the player should have been eligible for, considering the fact that the winnings were subject to the maximum cashout that is applied upon withdrawal, it has been concluded that the player had already received all eligible funds. The player had been asked to confirm if he was aware of the maximum cashout condition but failed to respond, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from the US is experiencing issues with withdrawing her winnings. The casino refused to process the withdrawal via Bitcoin. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player had been experiencing troubles with verification for over two weeks. Live chat wasn't working and no one was replying to their contact attempts via phone or email. As a result, the player was not able to withdraw their winnings.

The player had requested a withdrawal and was upset it was taking so long. Casino representative promised they would have a look at the case, but there was no response ever since (neither from the casino, nor the player).

The player complained about receiving only first of his two withdrawals and not knowing when the second withdrawal will be incoming. The casino was giving various excuses for the delay. There was no reaction to this complaint.

The player from the United States had his winnings cancelled without further explanation. According to the casino, the player broke the rules by redeeming no deposit bonuses consecutively without making a deposit. The casino provided us the evidence and thus we closed the complaint as unjustified.

The player has struggled to withdraw his balance due to ongoing verification. The player had the fifth free chip in a row with no subsequent deposits in the middle, and the complaint was closed as "rejected".

The player from the US is experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to ongoing verification. The casino clarified the player wasn't eligible for the winnings. After we reviewed the evidence the casino provided, we concluded the same. The casino requested more documents for the purpose of verification. We ended up closing the complaint because the player stopped responding.

The player from the US claimed that she received only part of her winnings. The casino provided strong evidence suggesting that the winnings were paid. We ended up rejecting the complaint because it was not justified.

The player from US was accused of mixing funds. The casino representative has provided us with a sufficient evidence of the player's breach of terms and conditions of Royal Ace Casino and we have been left with no other option than to reject this complaint as 'unjusified'.

The player from Mexico is complaining about the lengthy verification process. The casino representatives were sufficient in proving us that the player was engaged in multiple accounts activity, therefore we were forced to reject this complaint as 'unjustified'.

The player requested a withdrawal of $1320 via wire transfer but the casino didn't accept both of the player's bank accounts. A casino representative offered to use the Bitcoin payment method instead, then confirmed recieving the crypto adress from the player specifying that the fee would be removed from the withdrawal request. The player agreed but hasn't received any updates regarding his request since then.

The player from Canada had his winnings cancelled to a rule forbidding a redemption of multiple consecutive Free Bonuses. After a closer examination, we ended up rejecting this complaint as unjustified.

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

The player from Canada provided documents for verification more than two weeks ago withdrawals still aren’t possible. The complaint was rejected as the casino proved account multiplicity of the player. The accounts were closed and balance refunded to the player.

The player from United States had requested a withdrawal a month before submitting the complaint. The casino informed us that the payment has been sent to the player a month later. Even though we assumed that this issue had been resolved, without a confirmation from the player, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from South Africa is experiencing difficulties withdrawing their winnings due to incomplete KYC verification. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from United States has requested a withdrawal, unfortunately, it has been pending due to ongoing account verification. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player requested a withdrawal but the casino kept asking him repetitively for new proofs of identity, delaying the payout request. In the end, the casino said that they had never received the deposit necessary for a valid play from the player. The player showed a proof that the deposit had been deducted from his bank account. The casino stopped communicating.

Player's account got verified, then he was asked to renew his driver's license due to it's approaching expiration. The player thought the casino was giving him a run-around and was stalling his pay-out. The casino didn't react to this complaint.

The player claimed an amount of more than $2000. He had several unpaid requests pending on his account, which have already been approved. He complained that he had to wait weeks or even months for his withdrawals. The casino replied to his complaint and informed him about his next incoming payment. The player provided a chat transcript with the casino support confirming sending money to the processor. No reply from the player about the actual status so far, he has probably received the money.

Player won an amount of $5000. He received half of the winnings after 6 weeks. He'd been claiming another half ($2500) for months, without success. The casino didn’t reply to his phone calls, emails or live chat communication attempts. Later on, the casino replied about the casino representative being out of office. Then the casino claimed they had sent out the second half of the winnings by a bank transfer, but the player said he had never received the money. We don't know whether the player has ever received the entire amount of his winnings.

The player from Australia has been waiting for his withdrawals since February. The casino managed to look into the issue and the withdrawals started coming to the player. The complaint was closed as 'resolved' since the withdrawals seem to be working to the player's satisfaction.

The player from Australia had been waiting to have her withdrawal processed for almost a month before submitting the complaint. The issue was resolved. Three weeks later, the player informed us she had received her funds.

The player won A$10,000 on May 22nd, 2019. All documents and withdrawals have been accepted and approved by the casino, but she only received A$2,480 and is still waiting for the rest. The issue was successfully resolved.

The player from the United States had requested a withdrawal three weeks prior, with one approval for $2500 on 8/29. Despite being informed that it was marked as a priority and would take 3-7 days, there had been no update or response from the casino after multiple inquiries. The issue was resolved when the casino confirmed that the final payment had been issued to a third-party payment provider for disbursal, and the player subsequently received all his winnings. The complaint was marked as 'resolved' in the system after confirmation of receipt.

The player from Indiana had requested three withdrawals over the past three weeks, totaling $6,251. Despite providing all required documents for verification and having the payments approved, she was told that the withdrawals were pending final steps, with no clear explanation provided. We contacted the casino to clarify the status of the payments, and the casino confirmed that the last withdrawal was processed and pending transfer. After continued delays and communication, the player finally received her last payment, resolving the issue.

The player from Minnesota had requested a withdrawal which had been delayed for 2 weeks. Despite completing the requested verification process and having regular exchanges with the casino, the $700 payout via Bitcoin had yet to be processed. The Complaints Team facilitated communication between the player and the casino, resulting in the casino approving and expediting the payment. The player later confirmed receipt of the funds, resolving the issue.

The player from the US had experienced a delay in the processing of his bitcoin withdrawal of $335.21. The withdrawal request had been placed more than a month ago, but the online casino had not provided any definitive timeline or updates despite multiple inquiries from the player. After the complaint had been lodged, the casino responded stating that the withdrawal had been approved at $133 after deducting the provided bonus of $202. The player later confirmed receipt of two payments totaling $117.60, suspecting the difference from the approved amount was due to a processing fee. We had confirmed the possibility of a processing fee and marked the complaint as resolved after the player had received his funds.

The player from Ontario had been trying to withdraw his winnings, originally from a no-deposit bonus, since September 2023. Despite having followed all promotional rules and ensured the correct usage of the bonus, the casino kept delaying the payout, giving a waiting period of 2-10 business days each time. After the player's complaint, we asked the casino to provide an update on the status of the player’s withdrawal request. The casino representative had confirmed the player's Bitcoin address and escalated the withdrawal for payment. The player had then confirmed receipt of his funds, and we had marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from the United States had followed all the necessary steps to play through a bonus and cash out. However, her withdrawal of $120 had not been approved despite assurances from a casino representative. After the player raised a complaint, we had facilitated communication between her and the casino. The casino had requested additional documentation and confirmation of the player's Bitcoin address. The player had expressed concern about the safety of sharing her Bitcoin address and the history of her withdrawal requests being cancelled. We had assured her that her Bitcoin address would only be visible to us and the casino. Eventually, the player received her payment and expressed gratitude for our assistance. The issue had been successfully resolved.

The player from Germany had requested a withdrawal from the casino a month ago, but had not received the funds. The player had confirmed that he had met the sales requirements for a no deposit bonus and had deposited $10 in Bitcoin to verify the payment method. This had been his first time playing at this casino and he had not redeemed any bonuses before. The casino had responded that players from Germany were not allowed to cash out on free welcome chips but mentioned a recent Bitcoin transfer of $24. The situation had been reviewed by the casino's relevant department. The complaint had eventually been resolved successfully.

The player from Alaska has been waiting for his withdrawal for two weeks, and suspects the casino might refuse to pay. He is dealing with multiple withdrawals, and even though a couple are approved, he has not received any payment.

The player from Poland won $100 from a free chip but has been unable to contact the casino despite submitting all the required documents. The player confirmed the case was resolved, so we closed it accordingly.

The player from the United States has requested a withdrawal more than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Indiana had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout hadn’t been received yet. We contacted the casino and found out that 2 of 3 withdrawal requests were already processed, and the third one was about to be approved by the casino. After several days, the player confirmed receiving their winnings in full amount, so we closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from the United States is experiencing difficulties withdrawing her winnings due to ongoing verification. The player's account had been verified, and the player confirmed receipt of the payment.

The player from United States has requested a withdrawal more than three weeks ago. It has been pending since. Even if we’ve assumed that the issue has been resolved, without a confirmation from the player, we were forced to reject this complaint. The player contacted us once more, stating that the issue was not resolved, therefore we reopened this complaint to give it one more chance. The player got payed and the case is resolved.

The player from the United States faced issues with withdrawing money from the casino. Despite the rule stating a minimum cash out of $100 for monthly cash back, she received only $20, with the casino citing the use of Coindraw as the reason. The player questioned if different withdrawal methods had different rules and experienced delays in getting responses from customer service. The issue was resolved after the casino provided the remaining balance, allowing the player to put it back in withdrawal. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Puerto Rico had struggled to withdraw her winnings from the casino for several months, despite having provided necessary documents repeatedly. The casino had continuously denied the payout due to supposedly missing documents. The withdrawal had eventually been approved on April 12, but the funds were not sent until May 11. After the player confirmed the receipt of her funds, we had marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from the United States had tried to make a withdrawal but was informed about missing documentation. Even though he provided all the requested documents, the casino kept asking for more information. The player had won the money without an active bonus. After the Complaints Team intervened, the Casino's Representative had confirmed that the player's account and bank transfer details were correct and that the withdrawal of $300 had been approved. However, the amount had included a non-cashable deposit bonus of $142, leaving the player with $158 to withdraw. This had been escalated for express disbursal. The player later confirmed receipt of the payment, and the complaint had been resolved.

The player from Kansas had requested two separate withdrawals from Slots Garden, totalling $2400. The casino had initially refused to pay her through Bitcoin, her preferred method because she hadn't deposited with Bitcoin. The casino had requested her bank details for a wire transfer, but later stated they couldn't send the money to her bank. The player had been unwilling to change her bank or open a second account to receive her winnings. After the intervention by us, the casino released the first portion of the withdrawal via Bitcoin and expedited the remaining payment. The player had confirmed receipt of her winnings and the issue had been successfully resolved.

The player from California had had an issue accessing her Slots Garden casino account via Inclave after accumulating about $1,400 in winnings. She had been unable to get in touch with Slots Garden or Inclave and had suspected foul play due to sudden device problems. We had to reject the complaint due to the player's lack of response to our messages and questions. However, the player later confirmed that the issue had been resolved.

The player from the United States had had issues withdrawing her $400 winnings from an online casino. Despite having submitted the required identification multiple times, her withdrawal had remained "in process" for over three weeks. The casino had clarified that the approved withdrawal amount was $130, accounting for a bonus and account confirmation deposit. Eventually, the player had received $116 of her winnings. The issue had been successfully resolved.

The player was facing issues with withdrawal. She had requested a payout of 880$ in Bitcoin, her payment method during the deposit. However, despite approval from the manager, the Bitcoin withdrawal was denied. It turned out it was a no-deposit bonus with a maximum cashout of $100 and a country restriction issue. Later, the complainant informed us that her issue was sorted out. The complaint is resolved.

The player from California has encountered problems with his withdrawal process despite verifying his account three times. He was promised a timeframe of 7 to 10 days which has extended, while communication with the casino remains the same. The issue of loyalty bonus limit was also raised. The complaint was resolved as the player's money got paid out.

The player from the United States had reported a delay in his withdrawal request since August 2nd. Despite having adhered to the casino's rules, his withdrawal request had remained unprocessed. He had confirmed that he was not a bonus abuser, as he had made numerous deposits and losses. The Complaints Team had asked for screenshots of his bonus and cashier histories for further investigation. Eventually, the player had confirmed that he received his payment from Slots Garden. We had closed the complaint as 'resolved', and had directed the player to open a separate complaint for another issue with Lucky Legends Casino.

The player from Virginia successfully beat the stipulated playthrough limit and requested a withdrawal. The casino requested a KYC process and a deposit of $10 in Bitcoin for address proof. While the player complied, their withdrawal request was later revoked due to casino's issues with CoinDraw. The player is unsettled about the additional waiting period stated by customer service and believes it's time for third-party intervention. We closed the complaint as resolved since the player confirmed receipt of the payment.

The player from the US requested four separate withdrawals using Bitcoin, but after two weeks, the requests were canceled and the money returned to their balance. Despite being assured that their issue would be resolved, the player hasn't received any specific support and the issue remains unresolved. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from South Africa had their withdrawals withheld and account blocked. The casino discontinued it's South African version, however they were able to process the withdrawal for the player and the complaint is resolved.

The player from South Africa was dissatisfied with the long withdrawal process and the casino’s support wasn’t helpful after inquiring about his withdrawal. The complaint was resolved. The player received his winnings nearly 3 months later, with unexpected fees deducted by one of the banks processing the payment.

William, a player from South Africa, won from a no deposit bonus and he is stuck on the verification process. He also expressed his dissatisfaction with the casino’s support and services. This case was successfully resolved.

The player from the US faced withdrawal issues after winning a $300 no deposit bonus. Initially, his withdrawal request was delayed and extended beyond the promised timeframe, which led to his account being locked. He was unable to access the site and could not contact the casino regarding his $300 winnings. The issue was resolved after the casino confirmed that the player's withdrawal request had been approved, and the winnings were sent to his registered Bitcoin address. The player acknowledged receipt of the funds, and the complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from the US had reported multiple approved payouts via Bitcoin in one day. However, after she received one payment, she was notified that she couldn't use Bitcoin anymore and was required to opt for a wire transfer and submit additional documents. Despite her initial resistance to opening a new account for wire transfer, as she had been initially instructed to open a Bitcoin account, the issue was eventually resolved. The player confirmed that the matter had been taken care of, leading us to close the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Kansas had experienced issues with her withdrawal from Planet 7 Casino as the operator had refused payouts via BTC, wire transfer, and check. The only option proposed had been opening an account with two banks, both inconveniently located for the player. After the player had opened a bank account and informed the casino, she was told to wait for a month to get her winnings due to the absence of a bank statement. However, the casino then allowed her to withdraw her winnings via Bitcoin, which she had initially requested. The player had received her winnings and was waiting for a payout from the casino's sister company, Raging Bull Casino. The Complaints Team had marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from California had reported that she had requested a withdrawal two weeks prior but had not received the payout despite it having been approved. She had claimed to have received various excuses from the casino and had been told to wait longer. The player's account had been verified, and she had fulfilled her wagering requirements. She had also reported having daily, unproductive conversations with the casino. After we invited the casino representative to the conversation, the casino confirmed that the payment had been processed. The player had confirmed receipt of her winnings, albeit with some confusion due to unfamiliar emails. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Australia has requested a withdrawal three weeks prior to submitting this complaint. Unfortunately, winnings haven’t been received yet. Player’s complaint has been resolved successfully.

The player from Australia is dissatisfied with the withdrawal process. He has been waiting for weeks for his withdrawal. The issue was successfully resolved, the player's winnings were eventually paid.

The player from United States requested a withdrawal and after more than 3 weeks of waiting for the payment, she decided to submit a complaint. The player received the payment approximately 5 weeks after the withdrawal request. The complaint is resolved.