ShinQueen Casino Review

The player from Japan had had approximately $12,500 worth of bonus and cash winnings confiscated by a casino, allegedly due to a violation of terms and conditions. Despite having submitted all the personal identification and income proof documents requested, the casino had maintained their decision. The player had claimed to have only registered once and played on his own device. However, the casino had provided evidence suggesting that the player had created multiple accounts to exploit the welcome bonuses. After examining the evidence, we had concluded that it was challenging to prove the player's claim of having only one account. Consequently, the complaint had been rejected.

The player from Japan had experienced difficulties during the additional KYC process. The casino had demanded a picture with a landmark from his last login location. Despite several attempts, the player was unable to provide the requested document because the casino refused to disclose the exact location. This issue was inhibiting his withdrawal of $5,600. The player, who worked in the transportation industry, stated that he used his smartphone to play, often outside of his home. Despite the player's willingness to cooperate, the casino continued to insist on a photo from the last login location. The complaint had been extended by 7 days, but was eventually rejected due to the player's lack of response.

The player from Japan had his winnings confiscated, with the claim that he held multiple accounts and received multiple bonuses. The player argued against these claims and stated that the casino refused to provide evidence. He had reached out to Casino Guru for help as a third-party mediator. After examining the case and reviewing the evidence provided by the casino, we found that the player indeed breached the casino's terms and conditions by having multiple accounts linked with the same IP, claiming identical bonuses, using similar payment methods, and engaging in similar gameplay. Therefore, the complaint was rejected as unjustified, and the player was advised to contact the casino's licensing authority if he was not satisfied with the decision.

The player from Japan had won $13000 on Queen Casino's games using cash. However, his attempts to withdraw were refused. Despite the completion of KYC verification, his account was locked and he was told to wait for an email. The player later admitted that his gambling activity might have violated the casino's terms of use and requested the complaint to be deleted. Consequently, the complaint was closed as per the player's request.

The player from Japan had completed all KYC procedures but was experiencing delays in withdrawals. Communication with the casino’s live support had resulted in unsatisfactory responses. The player had claimed that it had been 7 days since the withdrawal request and despite the account being verified, the withdrawal had not been processed. The casino, however, had claimed that the player's account showed suspicious activity, including rapid changes in IP addresses, suggesting the use of masking tools or account sharing, which were against their terms and conditions. The player had denied using a VPN or multiple devices. Despite the player's explanation, the casino had stood by its decision, leading to the complaint being marked as 'unresolved'. We had recommended the player to contact the Gaming Curacao Authority for further assistance.

The Russian player had won some money and was asked to pass a KYC procedure to proceed with the withdrawal. However, due to technical issues on the casino's website, he had been unable to upload the necessary documents and the casino had denied alternate methods of sending these documents. After prolonged communication, the casino had managed to fix the issue and the player had been able to upload his documents. However, after account verification, the casino had confiscated the player's winnings citing violation of their Terms and Conditions. As the player's issue was related to sports betting, which we didn't have enough insight into, we were unable to resolve the complaint. The player had been advised to submit a complaint on sports betting-related websites.

The player from Japan had reported that his withdrawal request was denied by the casino, suggesting a terms and conditions violation. The player had stated that he deposited 40,000 yen and was trying to withdraw $800 in winnings. The casino, however, had detected multiple linked accounts associated with the player and suspected the use of masking address tools. The casino had provided evidence to support their claims. We concluded that the player's complaint had been invalid due to violation of the casino's terms and conditions. The player had been advised to contact Gaming Curacao for further assistance.

The player from Japan had deposited $6,000 and managed to win $1,000. He had requested a withdrawal of $7,000 three days prior, but the funds had not yet arrived. Despite his repeated inquiries, the casino's support team had only assured him that they were reviewing and checking the request. After contacting our Complaints Team, he had been advised to wait for 14 days to allow the casino to process the withdrawal. The player agreed to wait and contacted us again after 14 days to confirm that his withdrawal had been successful. Consequently, we had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Japan had been refused withdrawal of his winnings due to an alleged violation of terms of service, which the casino had refused to disclose in detail. His account had been verified on October 7, 2023, and he had made several deposits and withdrawals. The casino had claimed that the player had too many betting records in a day, suspecting system betting, but confirmed that all withdrawal transactions had proceeded. Despite our efforts to communicate with the player and the casino, the player had not responded to our messages, leading to the complaint being rejected.

The player from Japan had won $2,000 on Dunbine but her attempt to withdraw was denied. The casino had cited a violation of terms of service, but hadn't provided an explanation despite the player's enquiries. The Complaints Team had intervened and contacted the casino for clarification. After reviewing the evidence, the team found that the player had breached the casino's terms and conditions by misusing multiple accounts to take advantage of bonuses. As a result, the Complaints Team had supported the casino's decision to deny the withdrawal. The player had been advised to contact the casino's licensing authority, Gaming Curaçao, if unsatisfied with the outcome.

The player from Japan had an issue with ShinQueen Casino after her winnings of $6550.7 were reverted back to the initial deposit amount due to an alleged violation of the casino's terms of use. The casino did not specify the violation. Our Complaints Team had reached out to the casino for clarification and had reviewed the evidence provided. The team had found that the player had violated the terms by creating multiple accounts from the same IP address, claiming identical bonuses, and showing similar gameplay patterns. As a result, the complaint was rejected as unjustified. We had advised the player to contact the casino's licensing authority, Gaming Curaçao, if she was not satisfied with our decision.