Shuffle Casino Review

The player from Germany claimed damages against Casino Shuffle.com for illegal gambling and fraud after having been able to register, deposit, and withdraw on the site, only to be informed that they did not accept players from Germany. Despite requesting proof of a German gambling license, she only received a Curacao license and remained without an overview of her deposits and withdrawals. She demanded immediate compensation for her losses. The Complaints Team concluded that since the casino did not explicitly restrict players from Germany, the player was free to play there, and they closed the complaint as no further assistance was requested.

The player from Finland has requested a withdrawal of $844 from Shuffle almost a month ago, having completed all KYC verification procedures. Despite multiple attempts to contact support, he receives no substantial replies and his withdrawal remains unprocessed.

The player from Belgium faced issues with withdrawing funds. Despite having completed the full verification process, including ID and live video verification, the casino continued to withhold his winnings without a valid explanation. The complaint was ultimately rejected due to the player's lack of response to the Complaints Team's inquiries, which prevented further investigation into the matter.

The player from Morocco requested a withdrawal made three weeks prior and had been waiting since December 28. Despite completing the KYC process, there had been no resolution. The issue remained unresolved as the Complaints Team stated that managing multiple accounts from the same household violated the casino's Terms and Conditions, making it impossible to verify account ownership. Furthermore, the team clarified that they did not handle complaints related to sports betting, which led to the closure of the complaint.

The player from Morocco has been waiting for three weeks to withdraw 4,000 USDT after completing all verification steps. They previously made deposits totaling 15,000 but lost most of the amount, leaving only the 4,000 to withdraw.

The player from Turkey had faced a 21-day delay in the verification of account documents, despite having sent clear photos multiple times. The casino remained unresponsive, leading the player to suspect it might be a scam. The Complaints Team had intervened, but the casino stated that the player engaged in abusive betting practices, resulting in the withholding of winnings and removal from the platform. The team concluded that they were unable to assist further due to the nature of the complaint being related to sports betting, which fell outside their current capabilities.

The player from Norway had been waiting for 2.5 months for a withdrawal and received unhelpful responses from customer support, indicating that the compliance team was reviewing his verification submission. There was a lack of communication after he replied to their messages. The issue was resolved after the player provided the requested KYC documents, leading to the casino processing the withdrawal. The player confirmed receipt of the funds, and the complaint was marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

The player from Bulgaria faced account restrictions after making a successful withdrawal and reaching a 200k turnover. Despite having successfully completed address verification, the casino continued to manually review documents for nearly 10 days, leaving the player unable to access his funds or place bets. The Complaints Team investigated the issue but ultimately closed the complaint as 'rejected' due to indications of another linked account/multiple accounts, but mainly breaches of rules related to sports betting, which is a kind of issue casino.guru currently does not handle.

The player from Myanmar had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks before contacting us. Winnings had not been obtained up to that day. The player reported that their withdrawal of $26,000 was still under review due to KYC verification, despite having a history of successful transactions. We had attempted to assist by requesting additional information and communication from the player, but due to a lack of response, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Singapore disputed Shuffle Casino's denial of participation in an Airdrop after being approved for KYC while residing in a restricted jurisdiction. He stated that the casino should not have allowed him to deposit and wager if his location barred him from participation. The player sought a refund of his deposits, claiming unjust enrichment due to the casino's oversight. The Complaints Team concluded that since the player had no real money winnings and only held shuffle tokens, they were unable to assist further, and the complaint was rejected. The player was advised to contact the casino's licensing authority for further assistance.

The player from Ukraine had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings had not been obtained up to that day. The player reported that he had passed a liveness check, but his withdrawal remained unprocessed after 14 days. After intervention, the issue was resolved, and the player confirmed that he had received his winnings of $2,200, although the amount was affected by exchange rates. The complaint was marked as resolved by us.

The player from North Macedonia had opened a second account at the casino despite having set limits on his first account to control losses. Although he acknowledged violating the terms of service, he questioned why the casino allowed him to continue gambling and sought a refund for his losses. The Complaints Team reviewed the situation and noted that the player did not request self-exclusion or complete the verification process for either account. Consequently, it was determined that the creation of multiple accounts violated the casino's Terms and Conditions, leading to the rejection of the complaint and the refund request.

The player from Russia had not received a response after submitting all required verification documents for a $500 withdrawal a week prior. The issue remained unresolved as the player did not respond to the Complaints Team's inquiries for further information. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to the lack of communication from the player.

The player from Brazil had a self-excluded account with remaining funds that he wanted to withdraw. Despite the self-exclusion, he sought to retrieve his money. The Complaints Team attempted to assist by requesting additional information and extending the response time, but the player did not respond to the inquiries. As a result, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Canada experienced a delay in withdrawing funds from Shuffle Casino since requesting it on September 30th. Although the player had completed the verification process by providing the required documents, the funds had not been transferred, and the support team only stated that the documents were still under review despite confirming successful verification on their website. The issue was resolved as the withdrawal was approved, and the player received their money.

The player from Ukraine had requested a withdrawal of 270 USDT on September 8 and completed the KYC process. However, after 30 days of waiting and multiple contacts with support, who only advised to wait, the player had not received the funds. The casino later confirmed that the player’s verification had been accepted but cited abusive behavior related to sports betting as the reason for account restrictions. Due to the nature of the complaint being sports betting-related, the Complaints Team could not assist further and advised the player to seek help from other services specializing in sports betting issues.

The player from Japan had completed KYC authentication and had requested withdrawals of 140,000 yen and 200,000 yen, but these requests remained unprocessed. Despite multiple contacts with support, the player only received updates that the compliance team was investigating. The Complaints Team reviewed the case and contacted the casino, which provided evidence that the player had violated terms by opening multiple accounts to abuse bonuses. Consequently, the complaint was rejected as unjustified, and the casino's actions were upheld.

The player from China faced issues with identity verification, having passed multiple checks, but was still subjected to a manual review. Meanwhile, their withdrawals had been pending for 13 days without resolution. The Complaints Team communicated with the casino, which confirmed that the player's funds had been successfully withdrawn on September 29. However, the player did not respond to follow-up inquiries, leading to the conclusion that the complaint could not be further investigated and was ultimately rejected.

The player from Japan faced issues accessing Pragmatic Play at Shuffle Casino and received inadequate support from customer service. After expressing frustration with the support representative, communication with support was severed, leaving the player without guidance or response to their emails. The Complaints Team attempted to gather more information from the player but ultimately rejected the case due to the player's lack of response. Consequently, no further investigation or solutions could be provided at that time.

The player from Lithuania had requested a withdrawal of 521.58 USDT three weeks ago but was still undergoing KYC verification despite having submitted all required documents. The casino had not provided a timeframe for the process or any details. After intervention from the Complaints Team, the player was asked to perform a liveness check, which led to the approval of his withdrawal. The issue was then marked as resolved in the system.

The player from Romania faced withdrawal issues due to accusations of multi-accounting, despite both accounts being KYC verified. Communication with casino support proved unhelpful, even after the player proposed to provide documentation through FaceTime. The Complaints Team intervened, clarifying the situation with the casino, which ultimately agreed to re-enable withdrawals for the player’s account. The player successfully withdrew funds after the error preventing the withdrawal was lifted. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Norway had withdrawn winnings from a first deposit bonus but only received half of the amount. After waiting over six weeks for the remainder, the casino had requested proof of address, which was approved, but then the account was closed, and the remaining funds were confiscated. The Complaints Team had investigated the situation and concluded that the player had either colluded with others or used multiple accounts to exploit the casino's welcome offer, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Malta reported significant losses of over $44,000 after being allowed to create multiple accounts, despite having previously self-excluded due to gambling addiction. The player highlighted that Shuffle failed to enforce responsible gambling measures, allowing him to deposit and lose substantial amounts of money. He requested a refund for his losses while expressing a willingness to sign documents waiving future claims if the issue was addressed. The complaint was rejected due to the absence of evidence proving the player's self-exclusion request, which was necessary for further investigation.

The player from Egypt had his account locked by the casino, which accused him of creating multiple accounts. Despite completing and passing the KYC process, his withdrawals remained locked. He wanted to use his account normally and resolve the withdrawal issue. The Complaints Team had attempted to assist by reaching out for further information and extending the timeline for resolution. However, due to a lack of response from the player, the complaint was ultimately rejected.

The player from the Philippines had smooth withdrawals until their recent win was flagged, requiring KYC documentation. Despite promptly submitting the documents, the player's account was suspended due to alleged multiple accounts, which the player denied. The casino clarified that the issue pertained solely to sports betting activities. Consequently, we were unable to assist as our expertise did not cover sports betting disputes, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Japan had converted their initial deposit bonus into cash and withdrew 3,000 USDT from Shuffle Casino. However, a further withdrawal of 4,740 USDT was blocked due to pending proof of address verification (KYC3), which had not been processed by the casino. The casino later provided evidence that the player had breached the bonus terms and conditions by creating multiple accounts to abuse the First Time Deposit Bonus. We concluded that the casino had acted in accordance with its terms and conditions, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Argentina had reported being blocked from support after complaining about continuous losses and requesting a bonus. The player had also stated that multiple requests made via email to delete the account had gone unanswered. We had informed the player that we couldn't dictate the rules of bonuses or compel casinos to close players' accounts unless they expressed gambling problems. The player then requested to delete their account on our platform, which we complied with, and closed the complaint.

The player from Brazil was unable to access their casino account, which prevented them from withdrawing their funds. The player's account had been fully verified and they had requested self-exclusion, but not permanently. Despite this, the account was suspended and the player couldn't access their funds. We attempted to gather more information from the player to better understand the situation and help resolve it. However, due to a lack of response from the player, we were unable to proceed with the investigation or provide potential solutions.

The player from Germany had deposited 0.1btc in an online casino and had managed to increase their balance to 0.177btc. However, the casino had blocked the player's withdrawal option, accusing them of having multiple accounts due to similar playing patterns and geographical location with a friend. The player had refuted these allegations, stating they only had one account and had not violated any rules. The casino had linked the player's account to another account that had been closed due to fraudulent behavior, claiming the player had earned most of their winnings from sports betting. Eventually, the player had reported reaching an agreement with the casino, resolving the issue. However, the player later admitted to having used an abusive betting strategy, which led to the rejection of their complaint.

The player from Italy was unable to withdraw winnings from Shuffle. The casino claimed a violation of terms and conditions due to the use of a VPN and engaging in sure bets. The player contested the casino's interpretation of these terms. The player admitted to using a VPN but claimed it was not used while betting on Shuffle. He also acknowledged engaging in sure bets, but argued that Shuffle should not have been concerned with his betting activities on other platforms. We contacted the casino for more information, but ultimately had to reject the player's complaint due to its relation to sports betting, which fell outside our area of expertise.

The player from Ukraine had experienced a delay in withdrawing 160 USDT, even though his account was verified. He had also faced difficulties in contacting the casino's customer support. We had advised him to wait for at least 14 days after requesting the withdrawal, as delays could have been due to pending KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests. The player did not respond to our follow-up messages, which hindered further investigation. However, we later reopened the complaint upon request from the casino, which confirmed that the player's winnings had been fully paid after he provided the necessary KYC documentation. We had then marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from the US had found his account on Shuffle platform locked with 0.12 ETH still in it. The casino claimed multiple accounts had been created from the same IP address and device with the same betting pattern, thus violating their services' terms. The player stated he used a VPN in a supported region and only one device for betting which was similar to that of many other players. He denied using false identity information. The player also added that he had only provided basic KYC1 information. After reviewing the case, we found that the main issue was centered around the player's use of sports betting, which we currently do not have enough insight into. As such, we were unable to evaluate the issue properly and the complaint had been rejected.

The player from Norway had encountered a system error in the middle of auto bet on a dice game. After a winning streak had boosted his balance from $75 to $425, the betting system had failed to reset the bet from $120 to $0.94 after a loss, draining the balance in three spins. The player had also noted unresponsiveness from the casino. Despite the player's attempt to provide a video as evidence, we could not accept it as it did not directly show his game. Consequently, due to lack of solid evidence, we had to reject the complaint.

A player from Spain is having an issue with an online casino based in the Netherlands that operates with cryptocurrency. Although some games allowed access, other games denied it due to location restrictions. After contacting support, the player's account was closed and they wish to recover their lost funds. The complaint was rejected as the player had no remaining balance on account when it got blocked.