Stake Casino Review

The player from Bulgaria faced account restriction due to alleged 'abuse'. The casino had requested proof of address, but rejected the documents he provided as they did not meet their criteria. As he lived with his parents, he was unable to provide utility bills, the only documents the casino accepted. This issue had been ongoing for a year. Despite our attempts to assist and extend the response time, the player did not respond to our queries. Hence, we were unable to further investigate and had to reject the complaint.

The player from India had reported that his account at the online casino had been temporarily suspended, even though he had been providing the requested documents for several weeks. He had requested for the account to be unblocked so he could withdraw his funds. The player had been participating in both casino games and sports betting, and his winnings were not bonus-related. He claimed to have submitted multiple types of documents for verification, but the casino had rejected them. The issue escalated when the casino allegedly removed his email from his account, preventing him from accessing it. The player had accused the casino of fraud. However, the complaint was ultimately rejected upon the player's request.

The player from Ukraine had deposited funds into his online casino account but had faced verification issues. Despite having submitted numerous documents, the casino had rejected them as he couldn't provide proof of address, since he was living with his parents. The player had requested a refund of his initial deposit. The Complaints Team had explained that KYC and AML regulations were crucial for verifying the legality of funds and players' financial capacity. However, due to the player's lack of response to further inquiries, the Complaints Team had been forced to reject the case. They emphasized that the player could have reopened the complaint in the future.

The player from Germany had reported a loss of 20,000€ at Stake.com between 2021 and 2024. He had discovered that the casino didn't hold a license for Germany, yet it hadn't blocked access. Despite his frequent large deposits, no measures had been taken to address his potential gambling addiction. The player had demanded reimbursement of his losses. We had explained that we helped players whose funds had been confiscated due to being from a restricted country, but we couldn't penalize casinos for lacking specific licenses. We also highlighted the casino's self-exclusion policy. However, as the player hadn't responded to our inquiries about his withdrawable balance, communication with the casino about gambling issues, and account accessibility, we had to reject the complaint.

The player from Egypt had been having issues with the casino's identification requirements. Despite having provided a national ID and driver's license, the casino insisted on a passport, which the player didn't possess, preventing him from withdrawing his $11,255 winnings. The player admitted that the personal information on his account didn't match his actual details. We had explained to the player the importance of accurate personal information when registering an account, as per the casino's terms and conditions. Due to the player's failure to provide correct personal information, we couldn't assist further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Argentina had his account suspended by Stake due to incomplete verification steps. Despite having provided the documents as requested, including credit card statements and payment receipts, the casino had rejected them and requested a utility bill which the player couldn't provide. The player lived in his brother's house and all utility bills were under his brother's name. The casino insisted on a utility bill under the player's name, causing frustration to the player. The player had decided to comply with the casino's request and decided to pay the utility bills for the next three months to have the necessary documentation. The complaint was closed as the player had agreed to cooperate with the casino's verification process.

The player from California had encountered a game error on live roulette where his balance was mistakenly cleared to zero. The support team had insisted he made these bets, however, he denied doing so and believed that a technical error had occurred. He had lost his entire balance due to this issue. Upon further investigation, we found that the player was unable to provide sufficient evidence to support his claims as the incident had occurred in January and the game history on Stake does not save indefinitely. Therefore, we were unable to proceed with the complaint due to lack of evidence. The player had been advised to contact the licensing authority or the game provider for further assistance. The complaint was subsequently rejected.

The player from India had his account suspended due to accusations of having multiple accounts. Despite attempts to fulfill KYC requirements and uploading his documents, the casino has continually rejected his verification and denied him access to his funds amounting to $3000.

The player from Japan had complained about account suspension by gaming support due to a misunderstanding. We had informed the player that casinos had the right to restrict or close accounts if they suspected irregular play or other questionable activities. The player was also informed that if there was no active balance in the casino account, our ability to assist was limited. Despite extending the complaint's resolution time frame by 7 days, the player did not provide any substantial response. Therefore, we suggested the player consider other casinos and had to reject the complaint due to lack of actionable information.

A player from Lithuania is having trouble confirming Level 3 and Level 4 verification, despite submitting the necessary documents. All submitted documents have been rejected, and the player has described the communication as poor.

The player from Belgium, despite a self-imposed ban, had been able to start playing on Stake four months ago. He stated that Stake had accepted his verification and allowed deposits, despite the fact that they did not possess a Belgian license. After reviewing the case, we had decided not to proceed further due to our inability to handle complaints related to licensing regulations and policies. The player had been informed about this decision and given a chance to respond, but no further communication was received from his side. Consequently, we had to reject the complaint due to the lack of response.

The player from Quebec reported that Stake Casino claimed a linked account was associated to the player, supposedly banned due to location restrictions. The player denied creating this account. The player had not deposited any money or won any winnings, as he was unable to access the casino due to his account being in "withdraw only mode". He submitted his information and a driver's license for verification. The player later confirmed that the casino had allowed him to verify his account and stopped claiming that he had another main account. We marked the complaint as 'resolved' following the player's confirmation.

The player from France had experienced a delay in his Bitcoin withdrawal from an online casino due to an unconfirmed CPFP transaction with a low fee. He had made successful withdrawals in the past and this had been the first time he encountered a problem. The player had contacted both the wallet service provider and the casino. The wallet service provider had informed him that the transaction fees were too low and it would take time for the transaction to be processed. Eventually, the player was refunded and we had since marked the complaint as resolved.

The player from British Columbia had complained that Stake Casino had blocked his account, which prevented him from claiming his expected monthly bonus. We had explained to the player that we could not force the casino to reopen his account or release unclaimed bonuses. Due to these circumstances, we had to reject the complaint.

The player from India was unhappy with stake.com due to poor returns on his games. He claimed to have lost around $100 over three deposits without seeing any increase in his balance, even while making the smallest possible bets. After a thorough review of the submitted game history, we found no evidence of manipulated Return to Player (RTP) in the games. We explained to the player about the law of big numbers and the gambler's fallacy. Ultimately, we concluded the complaint was unjustified.

The player from South Africa had multiple issues with Stake Casino, including disappearing funds and multiple dead spins. They found the support to be ineffective, providing generic responses, and were unresponsive to investigations. The player wished to log a formal complaint for investigation. However, we concluded that an investigation could only be initiated with relevant evidence such as a betting history where discrepancies in deducted amounts were clearly visible. We advised the player to contact the casino's licensing authorities with the same kind of evidence. The player understood and requested to close the complaint, which we respected and closed the case.

The player from Ireland had his account flagged for potential money laundering. He was struggling with the third and fourth levels of upper verification, despite having submitted numerous documents including proof of address and source of funds. The communication with the casino's live chat seemed not to be helpful. The player had been trying to verify his account since 6th December. He had submitted his driver's license, selfie with the license, and a note, all of which were accepted. However, all other documents had been rejected. The player also complained about the inconsistent information given by the live support and the KYC team. We engaged the casino in the conversation and they stated they had sent a Veriff link for the user to complete the verification, but the user claimed the link did not work. The casino sent another link with a 7-day expiration. We advised the player to complete the process as soon as possible, but due to lack of response from the player, the complaint was eventually rejected.

The player from Austria had her Stake account permanently suspended, with €440 left in it. The casino cited unsuccessful verification attempts, but did not clearly explain the reason for rejection. The player tried using her husband's details for verification on the third attempt, which led to the suspension. The complaint was rejected as the player breached the casino terms.

A player from Bulgaria has accused the casino of rigging their in-house Blackjack game. The player claims to have lost a far larger number of bets than they statistically should have, resulting in a loss of approximately USD 30,000. The player emphasized the significant discrepancy between the casino's advertised house edge of 0.5% and the player's experienced rate of loss. The complaint was rejected as the player had no proof of his claim.

The player from Chile has encountered issues with the account verification process while trying to withdraw $12.2k in winnings from Stake.com. Despite providing 15 sets of pictures, multiple selfies, bank statements, credit card statements and other documents for the KYC process, the player's withdrawal is still being denied.

The player from Norway, who had self-excluded previously, had created a new account and deposited $77,750. He hadn't undergone any KYC verification that time. As his gambling addiction worsened, he had reached out to Stake.com for help. However, we found that the player hadn't provided sufficient evidence of having clearly stated his gambling problem during his self-exclusion request. Without this evidence, we were unable to proceed with the complaint or request a refund. We had advised the player on how to properly request self-exclusion in the future and the complaint was subsequently rejected.

The player from Vietnam is facing issues with Level 3 and 4 account verification at an online casino. The player submitted required documents several days ago, but they were rejected without an explanation. The player attempted to resubmit the documents and is experiencing poor communication from the support team. The casino has provided us with evidence of misleading documents, therefore we have rejected the complaint.

The player from India had faced issues with Stake Casino due to account suspension and withdrawal blocks. He had initially completed level one KYC, but subsequent KYC levels had been rejected. Communication with Stake Casino had been unresponsive. After a series of discussions with the casino and the Complaints Team, the player's account had finally been verified for all 4 levels and the suspension had been lifted. However, the player had reported encountering bet limit issues, which the casino had stated were determined by the odds maker. The Complaints Team had marked the complaint as resolved, as the initial issue of account suspension and withdrawal blocks had been addressed.

The player from Turkey has completed the first three levels of account verification, but he's repeatedly having trouble with the fourth level. Despite sending all document requests, his documents are always rejected. He does not have any other documents to send to fulfill the requirements. We contacted the casino, and it informed us about having reviewed the document so that account restrictions were removed. We asked the player to confirm this, however they stopped responding to our messages, so we were finally forced to reject the complaint.

The player from Brazil is experiencing an issue with account verification at the casino. At the time she submitted the complaint, it had been over a month since the process began, involving the submission of various documents and a specific selfie. Later, it turned out the user could not prove the origin of her income or the funds deposited to the casino, and so made the KYC/verification impossible. The complaint was rejected.

The player from Israel recounted multiple instances of game malfunctions during his time on a casino's Crash Game. Despite dealing with unresponsive buttons and website lag, he had managed to place bets, but lost around $5,000 over two years due to these glitches. The player's communications with the casino's support had not resolved the issue, and he refuted their suggestions of VPN use or rate limiting as the cause of the problems. After reviewing the evidence provided by the player, we confirmed that the casino had acknowledged a glitch in one of the rounds and promised a refund. However, we could not assist with past glitches as they should have been reported immediately. Consequently, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Egypt had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, his payout had not been received yet. His account did not have any verification issues. Despite having extended the response time and requested for updates, the player did not respond. As a result, we could not investigate the matter further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Sweden self-excluded themselves due to a gambling problem but was allowed to open a new account. The player now experiences a problem, having lost around 0.54 ETH. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Costa Rica had been dealing with an extended verification procedure at stake.com, despite having submitted several documents to prove his identity. After depositing 1.837 btc a year prior, he had managed to increase this to 4.02 btc, but couldn't access these funds due to the unresolved verification. The player had experienced difficulties with the casino's 4-level verification process, particularly at level 3, which required proof of address. After lengthy correspondence and with the help of the Complaints Team, the casino finally verified the player's documents and removed the restrictions on his account. The player confirmed the resolution of his issue, as he had been able to withdraw most of his funds and continue gambling on the site.

The player from Chile has been facing numerous technical issues with a game named Mega Wheel on the Stake online casino. These issues include rejected bets, inaccurate balance updates, and improper registration of wins. Despite multiple interactions with the support team, the issues persist, causing a loss of USD 300,000 in cryptocurrencies, which the player is now seeking to recover. The player stopped responding to our questions and comments, so we rejected the complaint.

The player from France managed to open and use an account in Stake, a casino which is prohibited in France. Despite his gambling restriction in the French casino, Stake allowed him to play and he has ended with significant losses. He is seeking assistance and hopes to recover his lost funds. The complaint was rejected as the player had no remaining balance on his casino account.

The player from Albania had his account closed due to a gambling problem back in 2021. He had been able to open a new account and deposit funds recently. He had claimed to have self-excluded himself permanently from the casino due to his addiction. However, the casino had stated that the player was permanently banned for having multiple accounts, which was a violation of their terms of service. The player had disputed this claim, stating he only had two accounts. Despite the disagreement, the player had decided to accept a partial refund and asked to have the case marked as resolved.

A player from India, who plays Mines on Stake.com, alleges that bets he made were manipulated. He provides an example of a bet that he placed with 2 mines being registered as 11 mines on the casino's back end.

The player from Norway is having difficulty using the chat facility in live games on Evolution Gaming, despite placing bets. Having tried multiple solutions like changing VPNs and using different computers, the issue persists and his attempts to get help from the casino and live support have not been fruitful.

The player managed to win $3.000 at the Stake Casino and requested withdrawal. The casino asked for verification documents, including bank statements or credit history from the player. Based on the player's words, he had made successful withdrawals previously but had never been asked to complete a verification of the 3rd level. The player disagreed with casino's requirements since it was a crypto casino, consequently, the bank statements were irrelevant. According to the player, he always used Bitcoin as payment method. The casino didn't respond to the complaint publicly and it remained unresolved.

The player from Germany deposited into his casino account. Shortly after the deposit, his account was suspended but was assured he could withdraw his balance. Despite the account being in 'withdrawal only mode', he's unable to withdraw his funds. The casino limited the player account because of suspicion of multi-accounting. However, after investigation, they realized everything was correct, so the player was able to withdraw their funds. We closed the complaint as resolved.

While playing dice on the computer, the player from Japan set a condition for autobet to stop if the balance dropped below or equal to $87.8 or 1 LTC. However, the autobet continued despite the balance falling below the set condition. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Albania is requesting a deposit refund after he was able to create another account despite having an active self-exclusion. The player mentioned he used personal information that was not his own in order to create this account, and therefore we were forced to reject the complaint as unjustified.

The player from Greece had his account blocked and his casino balance was withheld. We contacted the casino and found out that the player needed to finish verification of his account. After getting all the required documents for KYC, the casino provided internal checks, which took some time, but the account of the player was finally fully verified so we closed the complaint as resolved.

A verified player from Canada is experiencing glitches while playing at Stake casino, resulting in significant losses of over $15,000 USD. The user has chat logs with support admitting to the problem and seeks to file an official complaint to retrieve their funds totaling $80,000 USD. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Canada claims to have been able to create an account from a banned jurisdiction and have deposited a significant amount of money, resulting in overall losses of over $2,000,000 USD. The player seeks a refund of their net losses. After a closer examination, we ended up rejecting this complaint as unjustified.

The player from the United States encountered issues with their account after being asked to complete KYC verification. Despite submitting the necessary information, their account was placed in withdraw-only mode and they encountered difficulties withdrawing their funds. We rejected the complaint because the player breached the casino's T&Cs by providing false personal information.

The player struggles to verify his account. She was requested to provide the casino with an additional document to complete the verification. The complaint was rejected because the player did not respond to our messages and questions.

The player's self exclusion failed as he was able to play casino games. The case was rejected since the player filled different personal information, as the ones that were used in his initial self-excluded account. Therefore, the system could not prevent him from making deposits or the accounts.

The player from Latvia was experiencing difficulties verifying his casino account due to unverified proof of income. We contacted the casino and found out that the player didn't provide the payslip from his work. Since the player had been unemployed for some time, the casino agreed to accept other documents, so the player uploaded a loan agreement as a proof of income. The paper was accepted and the player's account was finally verified therefore we closed the complaint as resolved.

The player's requesting a refund as he was supposed to be excluded. As the player had previously consented to the settlement agreement that encompassed this account, we had no choice but to dismiss this case.

The player from Finland is requesting a refund in the name of his underage child who has managed to deposit funds into casino account. The case was redirected to the regulator, and we will update it according to their decision.

The player from Romania has sent an email requesting to avoid any possible registration from the casino. Unfortunately, later, the player was able to register an account. The case was rejected since the player has contacted the casino at wrong email address.

The player's unable to withdraw his money as the casino accused him of breaching terms. The complaint was rejected as the casino is not obligate to refund any balance to the player. This was the player's last complaint with us and as per his own request, his Casino.Guru account will be now deleted.

The player from Germany had his account blocked after he made a comment about suicide. The casino ignores the player since. After a closer examination, we ended up rejecting this complaint as unjustified.

The player's withdrawal disappeared as the casino claims he used the wrong crypto address. The player provided evidence from their cash app showing that the withdrawal had been reversed to a crypto wallet address. This address seemed to match one of those shown by the casino as the original sender of the payment. The casino denied that the payment had been returned to them, although later the support team of the casino told the player that the wallet in question was one of the casino's "hot" wallets. There was no further reply from the casino, so the complaint was closed as 'unresolved'.

The casino failed to identify a self-excluded player after he'd logged into the casino, deposited and lost everything. The player contacted casino's CEO and his account was put into withdrawal mode only. The player said the casino failed their responsible gambling process and was demanding full refund of his deposits. The casino were not willing to communicate with him any further.

The player from France had the account closed without the possibility of reopening it. Afterwards, they were able to open a new account and deposit funds. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player ''Hermer'', from Estonia, made a serious gambling addiction complaint due to the fact that casino didn't take into account his permanent self-exclusion request correctly for over two years. He was able to make thousands of bets during his "self exclusion" period. The casino responded saying the player barely used more available and direct means of communications provided and contacted them from different email addresses. The player argued that he'd used all methods of contacting the casino in order to request his self exclusion (email, live chat, telegram, public chats and forum). The player is requesting $10,000 which includes losses made after requesting self-exclusion plus for damages caused.

The player from Croatia has been blocked without further explanation. The casino stated that the player's account had been linked to multiple other accounts, and also that the authenticity of the player's documents was questionable. as we could not find a mutual resolution to this case, and the evidence available was inconclusive, we recommended the player contact the casino's licensing authority and submit a complaint to them. The player stopped responding at this point, so the complaint was eventually rejected.

The player from Italy has been accused of opening multiple accounts. The casino blocked his account while the player still had funds in it. The casino stated that the player's account was linked to multiple other accounts and also that the player had provided questionable documentation. Upon looking into the matter, it was determined that there was no evidence to suggest that the player's documents were not legitimate. However, the player had only used their account for sports betting. As we do not currently have enough insight into sports betting and sports betting platforms, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Austria wishes their deposits to be reimbursed since the casino doesn’t hold Austrian License. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Brazil is not able to use his account properly. No deposit or withdrawal methods are available. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player's unable to withdraw her balance as she used a shared account to deposit into the casino. The casino has decided to pay out the player's winnings, and the player confirmed receipt of the payment afterwards.

The player's self-exclusion failed, as he was able to deposit multiple times after his request. Since the player has never informed the casino about his addiction, we considered his refund request as unjustified, and we rejected the case.

The player from the US managed to make a deposit from a restricted country. Since the casino did not confiscate the player's winnings and the player lost their deposit voluntarily, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from Estonia has requested a self-exclusion. Unfortunately, the enquiry was ignored and one of the accounts remained accessible. The case was successfully resolved, and the player got the refund.

The player's account got blocked after the player reported a security breach. According to the player, a part of his winnings was withdrawn to an unknown wallet. We ended up rejecting the complaint since it was the player's login data that was compromised but the casino account wasn't hacked. The casino can't be held responsible if the player's personal information was stolen.

The player from Russia has been accused of opening multiple accounts. Unfortunately, based on the available information and updates, the complaint was temporarily closed and we were waiting for the regulator's final decision. Later, the complaint was reopened, and the player was asked to provide us with the regulator's decision. The regulator decided in favor of the casino, and after reviewing the case in detail once again on our side, we agreed with the decision. There are reasonable grounds to believe we are talking about multiple account use or collusion, as well as the impossibility of the player passing the verification/KYC, which seriously breaches the casino's terms and conditions accepted by the player upon registration.

The player's requested a refund because the casino allegedly did nothing to prevent his gambling addiction. After gathering and reviewing all the necessary data provided by the casino, the complaint was rejected as unjustified. The player seriously breached the casino's Terms and Conditions and did not provide us with any relevant data supporting his claims regarding self-exclusion or the fact that the casino was already informed about his gambling problems earlier. The player is not eligible for any deposit refund. The casino acted correctly and within its Terms and Conditions.

The player's requested a refund as he was able to deposit even though he is self-excluded. The case was rejected because the player did not fill correct personal information in order to bypass casino detection.

The player from the United Kingdom has tried to block their account on several occasions. Unfortunately, all the enquiries were ignored. The case was rejected because player did not fill correct personal information in order to bypass casino detection.

The player from Canada has requested a self-exclusion. Unfortunately, the enquiry was ignored and the player was able to reopen his account and placed further deposits. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Austria has been experiencing difficulties withdrawing their funds. Subsequently, all the funds were played and lost. We rejected this complaint as the funds have been played before we could intervene.

The casino reopened the player‘s account after it was closed due to a gambling problem. We did not receive any reply from the casino team, therefore the case was closed as 'unresolved'. The case was reopened, later rejected because the player during the further registrations did fill incorrect registration data. Therefore, the casino could not detect his self-exclusion.

The player from United States has tried to block their account on several occasions. Unfortunately, all the enquiries were ignored. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Russia had his account blocked for an audit after accumulating a substantial win. The casino informed us about the player exploiting some game bugs, however due to the insufficient evidence, the casino decided to pay out the player as act of generosity and the complaint is resolved.