Stake Casino UK Review

The player from Italy faced complications with the KYC process for withdrawing funds from Stake, despite having been verified at previous levels. He repeatedly submitted various documents, including utility bills and bank statements, but they kept getting rejected, specifically for not providing pay slips, which he could not produce as a self-employed professional. He suspected they were intentionally prolonging the process to frustrate users and hinder access to their funds. The issue was resolved when the casino confirmed that his account had been fully verified on October 14th, and he had since accessed his account and successfully made withdrawals. Even if we assumed that the issue has been resolved, without a confirmation from the player, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from Ukraine encountered issues while playing on Stake.com, facing an error that prevented access to games due to a claimed active wagering requirement, despite having made cash deposits without bonuses. After contacting support, a technical error was identified and resolved, but the player requested compensation for the loss of access and funds. The Complaints Team concluded that compensation could not be mandated as the deposits had been fully played, resulting in the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Greece, a diamond VIP at Stake Casino, is unable to request a withdrawal after winning €70,000 following a recent €40,000 deposit. Despite completing KYC verification and reaching out via email and live chat, the casino has not responded.

The player from Buenos Aires reported that after reaching 2.5 million in their account at Stake Casino, they experienced a significant drop in RTP despite a high volume of bets. They believed their account was being manipulated, leading to an unfair win percentage. The Complaints Team reviewed the player's gaming history and found that the amount of gameplay was insufficient to draw any conclusions about the RTP, which typically required 10,000 game rounds. Consequently, the complaint was closed due to a lack of evidence.

The player from Italy had completed the KYC verification on Stake but then faced issues with being able to play. Support informed him that he needed to complete further verification levels, yet his submitted documents were consistently rejected despite meeting the requirements. This process had been ongoing for weeks with no resolution. The complaint was rejected due to the player's lack of response to inquiries from the Complaints Team, which prevented further investigation.

The player from Bolivia faces issues with account verification at Stake casino, as the requested bank statements from the last three months are irrelevant due to using cryptocurrencies for deposits. The submitted documents are not accepted.

The player from India encountered significant issues with depositing money at stake.com, with multiple transactions amounting to 13,000 INR deducted from his bank account but not credited to his casino account. After repeated attempts for assistance, he faced delays and inadequate responses from the support team, leading him to believe they were stalling the process. The Complaints Team extended the investigation period multiple times to gather further information, but ultimately, due to a lack of response from the player, the complaint was rejected.

The player from Georgia had deposited $100 with a 200% bonus and won $2000, but faced an account ban and required 4 levels of verification. After completing all KYC processes, the account remained banned, and only the initial deposit was returned while the winnings were confiscated. The Complaints Team had reviewed the case but ultimately could not provide assistance due to insufficient insight into the specific issues related to sports betting. As a result, the complaint was rejected. After further investigation, it was determined that the player had breached the casino's terms and conditions, specifically concerning multiple accounts linked to similar IP addresses and devices. Consequently, the complaint was deemed unjustified.

The player from Italy reported a significant loss due to a malfunction in the betting system on stake.com, which failed to execute his betting strategy as intended. Despite reaching out multiple times for resolution and providing evidence, such as bet IDs and conditions, the live chat support team remained unresponsive and dismissed accountability for the loss of $140,000. The Complaints Team reviewed the evidence and concluded that the player's claims lacked sufficient proof of wrongdoing by the casino. The player was advised to contact the licensing authority for further assistance, as the casino asserted that the auto-bet configurations were solely managed by the player's device and that there were no server issues during the disputed betting period.

The player from Turkey had completed the first three levels of account review within 15 days but faced repeated rejections at Level 4 despite submitting all requested documents. He was unable to provide any additional documentation as advised. His account was permanently restricted due to violations of the casino's terms regarding multiple accounts. The player acknowledged having two accounts but claimed he had stopped using the first one, intending to support a content creator with the second. Despite receiving his funds, he raised concerns about the loss of bonuses during the account restriction period. The complaint was rejected as the casino had acted according to its terms and conditions.

The player from North Macedonia expressed concerns about multiple account issues with stake.com, including their permanent account ban not being honored and requests for a refund of deposits. Despite acknowledging gambling problems, the casino continued to offer options to unban his accounts, contradicting their stated policies. The Complaints Team reviewed the case and concluded that the player intentionally created multiple accounts and failed to comply with KYC requirements. As a result, the complaint was rejected due to the player's actions and the evidence provided.

The player from India faced issues with receiving a bonus after completing an offer, as the casino had blocked chat communication and was not responding to emails. The Complaints Team extended the response time multiple times to allow the player to provide necessary information regarding the bonus claim. However, the player did not respond to the inquiries, which led to the rejection of the complaint due to insufficient information for further investigation.

The player from Ukraine faced issues with KYC verification, as the casino repeatedly rejected the submitted documents required for level 3-4. Despite providing a stamped lease agreement and multiple bank letters, the casino continued to refuse the documents, citing various reasons each time. The Complaints Team concluded that the player's complaint was unjustified, as extensive evidence from the casino indicated serious breaches of their Terms and Conditions, including the creation of multiple accounts. The player was advised to contact the Curaçao Antillephone N.V. Licensing Authority for further assistance.

The player from India faced an account blockage, unable to withdraw, deposit, or place bets while in 'withdrawal-only mode.' Although he had completed Level 2 verification, Levels 3 and 4 were being rejected, and despite multiple communication attempts with support, he received no proper response. The Complaints Team reviewed the case and confirmed that the casino's decision to permanently restrict the account due to failure to provide the required verification documents was reasonable and could not be reversed. Consequently, the Complaints Team was unable to assist further in this matter.

The player from India had their account restricted to withdrawal mode only and was unable to place bets. They sought a resolution for this issue. The Complaints Team attempted to assist by contacting the casino and facilitating communication regarding the player's inability to withdraw funds due to account restrictions. However, the complaint was ultimately rejected after the player failed to respond to inquiries and follow casino instructions.

The player from Ukraine had her casino account temporarily suspended, despite having completed level 1 and level 2 verification. Her documents for level 3 and level 4 verification were consistently rejected. She sought account unblocking and the withdrawal of 14,632 USDT. The issue was resolved by the casino, allowing her access to her account for withdrawal. The player was informed to follow the casino's instructions to initiate the withdrawal process. The player has reported ongoing issues accessing her account. However, she did not respond to our follow-up inquiries, which led to the complaint being rejected.

The player from India reported that their account at Stake Casino was in "Withdraw-only" mode, preventing them from depositing, withdrawing, or placing bets. The Complaints Team attempted to gather necessary information regarding the player's situation, including the status of their KYC verification and the nature of their funds. However, due to the player's lack of response to multiple inquiries, the investigation could not proceed, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Ukraine is facing a blocked withdrawal at Stake casino due to incomplete KYC verification, despite submitting all necessary documents for levels 1, 2, 3, and 4. The support team is rejecting levels 3 and 4 verifications.

The player from India could not deposit money or play because their Stake account was set to withdraw-only mode. Despite submitting level-2 verification, it had not been reviewed yet. We informed the player that casinos have the right to restrict accounts for various reasons. The player later confirmed that their account had been restored to normal mode and all restrictions had been removed. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Ireland registered at the casino, placed one bet, and then had his account locked with a balance of $760. Despite passing three levels of verification by uploading the required documents, the casino rejected his final submission, requesting photographed documents instead of scanned versions. He felt the verification process was unnecessarily difficult. The Complaints Team attempted to assist by contacting the casino multiple times regarding the player's verification status. However, due to the player's lack of response and failure to complete the verification process, the complaint was ultimately rejected.

The player from Tennessee had complied with level 3 and 4 verification requirements, but the casino had not verified the account. After raising concerns, the player’s account was banned. We had requested additional information and extended the response time by 7 days. However, the player did not respond to our messages and questions, leading to the rejection of the complaint due to insufficient information.

The player from India had their Stake.com account suspended on June 20, locking $1,924 in funds. Despite submitting all required verification documents, including multiple address proofs, the casino repeatedly rejected the submissions and eventually permanently disabled the account, freezing the funds. The support team was non-responsive. We were unable to investigate further due to the player's lack of response to our inquiries, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

After the player from Japan interacted with the casino's live chat he was labeled as having a gambling addiction, resulting in their account being locked for withdrawals only. We argued that the casino had the right to close an account for any reason as long as no balance was withheld. The complaint was closed as there was no balance on the account and the casino's actions were within their rights.

The player from India faced withdrawal restrictions after depositing with USDT and betting on a tennis match. Despite the Bitcoin bonus balance being zero, the casino required a wagering requirement. The player was unable to get support through live chat or email. The issue was resolved when the casino fixed the error related to the bonus, allowing the player to withdraw $1643.1 USDT.

The player from India could not place bets or withdraw funds as his account was in withdrawal-only mode. He stated his KYC verification was pending despite submitting documents and had not made any withdrawals. The casino reported his verification was rejected due to submitting an underage person's document, and his account was blocked. We attempted to confirm this with the player but received no response. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to lack of communication from the player.

The account of a player from India was placed in "withdraw only" mode. We requested additional information from the player regarding any pending withdrawals, confiscated winnings, and account verification. Despite extending the response time by 7 days, the player did not provide the necessary details. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to lack of response.

The player from India was unable to withdraw, deposit, or place bets as the account was in "withdraw only mode." Despite contacting support, there had been no response or progress on verification. The player provided the necessary documents but received a fraudulent email requesting a security deposit to unblock the account. The casino confirmed the account was verified and that the player had requested an email change, which might have caused the login issues. The complaint was rejected as the account owner was accessing the account without issues and the casino had no technical problems.

The player from India could not deposit, withdraw, or place bets as their Stake account was in "Withdraw-only mode." Customer support had been unhelpful. The player's account verification was delayed due to multiple accounts with the same name. After sending a picture with his national ID, the account was verified, and the issue was resolved. We confirmed the resolution and closed the complaint.

The player from Japan had his account locked in March despite having completed KYC Level 3 and using it normally for months. After inquiring, he was asked to complete a more advanced KYC process, but his account was disabled entirely when he couldn't provide a passport. The player sought assistance in restoring his account to make withdrawals. The complaint was rejected because the casino provided evidence that the player had breached terms and conditions by creating multiple accounts, which was against their rules.

The player from India was unable to deposit money into their casino wallet because the account was in withdraw-only mode and the documents were under review. Customer support had not responded to their inquiries. The complaint was rejected by us because no funds were being held by the casino, and we could not assist further with the deposit issue.

The player from India had a suspended stake.com account with $1973 held, and withdrawals were blocked despite submitting all required documents, including level 4 proof of funds. Subsequently, the casino confirmed the player had successfully verified his account and withdrawn the balance. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from India encountered an issue while depositing money due to an error in level 2 verification, which was later corrected. However, the account remained in withdraw-only mode, preventing deposits. We requested additional details and screenshots to understand the problem but received no response from the player. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to a lack of communication from the player.

The player from India was unable to deposit or withdraw funds after winning money in a game of Mines on Stake. The account had been set to withdrawal-only mode, but withdrawals were not processed. The player confirmed that his account verification was pending and the winnings had accumulated without an active bonus. The complaint was marked as resolved after the complainant confirmed the issue had been resolved.

The player from India was unable to place bets, deposit, or access games due to partial exclusion and account restrictions starting from June 13, 2024. Despite numerous attempts to contact support, they only received automated responses, and their account documents had been under review for a week. The issue was resolved after the player confirmed it. The complaint was then closed as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from India lost $118 on bets and bonuses while playing the 'Mental' game by Nolimit City and requested a refund from the casino. The player mentioned self-excluding his main account due to a gambling addiction but creating multiple new accounts and losing approximately $1000. We reviewed the case and determined that the casino's quick registration process, which didn't require verification at sign-up, allowed the player to create multiple accounts using different email addresses. Since the casino closed the latest account and possibly all related accounts, and there was no universal standard for self-exclusion measures, the complaint was rejected. The player was advised to contact the licensing authority and seek professional help for gambling addiction.

The player from Norway had her account temporarily suspended for a suspected breach of terms of service. Despite providing various verification documents, her account was banned for allegedly submitting edited documents, a claim she denied. The player, who had a balance of approximately $11,550 and had deposited $38,000, sought evidence of the alleged document tampering and wished to withdraw her funds. We analyzed the information provided by the casino and found the issue too complex to reach a definitive conclusion. The player was advised to contact the licensing authority for further investigation.

The player from Romania, who had self-excluded on the casino's website, was still receiving promotional emails and sought resolution. The Complaints Team requested further information from the player but did not receive any response. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to the lack of player engagement.

The player from Greece had won a significant amount on Stake, but the casino only paid a small portion of the winnings. Despite providing evidence, including screenshots and conversation logs, Stake denied full payment, partially removed the win history, and repeatedly delayed responses. We reviewed the communication and evidence provided, but due to the lack of solid proof supporting a higher payout, the case could not proceed. The screenshots indicated a payout of $36.44. The player was advised to contact the game provider directly for further assistance.

The player from Canada had deposited $500 and received $1,000 in bonuses but discovered withdrawal conditions requiring 12,000 bets of $5 each. The player considered the terms unclear and sought the return of his deposit or the removal of the promotional conditions. The player ended up losing his balance after attempting to meet the wagering requirements. The complaint was rejected by us because the player continued betting, depleting his balance, which made a refund impossible.

The player from the US filed a dispute against Stake Casino for its inadequate Customer Due Diligence (CDD), Know Your Customer (KYC), Biometric Data, Facial Recognition Technology (FRT), and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) processes, which he claimed led to his compulsive gambling addiction. Despite multiple self-exclusion requests, he was able to create multiple accounts and continue gambling. He sought a refund of his deposits due to these failures. The Complaints Team concluded that without solid proof of the player's permanent self-exclusion requests or mention of a gambling problem, they were unable to proceed with the case. The complaint was rejected due to insufficient evidence.

The player from India reported that their Stake account was in withdraw-only mode, preventing them from making withdrawals or placing bets. We inquired about the status of the account verification and the documents submitted. The player mentioned that their account was under review. Due to a lack of response from the player to further questions, the complaint was rejected.

The Norwegian player underwent a second round of KYC verification at Stake and, despite submitting all requested documents, had their account permanently closed. They sought assistance as their attempts to resolve the issue were ignored and they could not access their funds. After a thorough review of the case and all provided evidence, it was determined that the documentation submitted by the player exhibited signs of inaccuracy and lack of integrity. Due to the substantial evidence, the casino's decision to close the account was upheld. The player was advised to contact the Curaçao Antillephone N.V. Gaming Authority for further assistance.

The player from India had deposited 900 rupees on May 22, 2024, but the money was not credited to his casino account. Despite multiple emails, he only received automated responses, and the chat option was not available for Indian players. We advised the player to contact his payment provider for an investigation, as the casino could not resolve this issue directly. The complaint was rejected due to the player's lack of response to our messages and questions.

The player from India had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout had not been received yet. We informed the player about typical processing times and advised patience. The player confirmed receiving the withdrawal, and the complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from India had faced issues with his casino account which had been suspended, preventing him from depositing or playing games. He had confirmed that his account was fully KYC verified and he had played various games like live casino, slots, and stake originals. The player's account had been suspended due to a comment about suicide he made in the chat support after experiencing significant losses. We found that the casino's actions aligned with their Terms and Conditions, specifically regarding responsible gambling policies. We had advised the player to seek professional help for problem gambling. Unfortunately, we could not assist further in this case.

The player from India had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks before submitting this complaint. Their money had not been received yet. He experienced issues with the casino's verification process, encountering errors when attempting to complete it. Despite our efforts to obtain more information and assist, the player failed to respond to our messages. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to lack of response.

The player from India reported that a winning hand and corresponding funds had inexplicably disappeared from his betting history on Stake Casino. Despite providing substantial evidence, the casino had not resolved the matter, resulting in a loss of approximately $174 USD. After repeated follow-ups and providing detailed evidence, including screenshots and bet archive data, the player acknowledged a misunderstanding regarding the settlement of his winnings. The issue was resolved as the player confirmed that Stake ultimately credited the winnings to his account, albeit with delays and inconsistencies in their system. The complaint was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Luxembourg, who was suffering from a gambling addiction, had requested account closure through chat support. Despite their self-reports of harmful excess, they managed to lose around 550,000 USDT, with daily losses reaching up to 500,000. The player then asked for a refund due to the casino's lack of action to close the account. The complaint was rejected because the player did not respond to our queries, making further investigation impossible.

The player living in Mexico encountered difficulties withdrawing winnings from Stake. He had trouble completing level 3 and 4 verification processes. His submitted documents (invoice, screenshots of payments, and ownership certificates) were rejected, leaving his withdrawal option disabled. He perceived that the casino was setting overly complicated requirements as a way to impede withdrawals. The Complaints Team contacted the casino, which clarified the discrepancies in the player's submitted information and provided specific instructions for resubmission. However, due to the player's lack of response, the complaint was ultimately rejected.

The player from the US had accidentally activated a bonus feature on the online casino after dropping his phone, which had resulted in a loss of $56. He had also raised concerns about the fairness of the gameplay and the placement of the "buy bonus" button. We had requested further details from the player to assist effectively, however, due to the lack of response to our messages and queries, we had been unable to conduct a further investigation or provide potential solutions. The case was rejected, but the option for the player to reopen the complaint in the future remained.

The player from China had been unable to withdraw their winnings due to a temporary account suspension by Stake Casino. The casino had requested the player to complete four levels of KYC verification. However, the player's information for the third and fourth levels was repeatedly rejected without clear reasons. The player had admitted to creating multiple accounts, which was a violation of the casino's rules. This admission led to the permanent suspension of the player's account and the freezing of their funds. As a result, we were unable to assist the player further due to their breach of casino rules.

The player from India had had account issues, which had prevented him from withdrawing funds or placing bets as the account had been in "withdraw-only mode." He had contacted support but had not received a satisfactory response, and his verification had not been reviewed. After he provided the necessary information, including his National ID card and a selfie with a piece of paper with the username and date, the casino had eventually accepted his documents. His account had returned to normal, he had been able to withdraw his funds, and his account had been level 2 verified. We had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Turkey reported that his account at stake.com had been unexpectedly put into withdrawal only mode, which prevented him from placing any bets or withdrawing deposited funds. Despite having contacted the compliance team, he had received no clear explanation or satisfactory resolution. He was seeking the return of his 300k USDT deposit. The player confirmed that his account had been verified in 2023 and he had made a single deposit of 300k USDT. After depositing, he discovered his account in withdrawal mode and later noticed his balance had been deleted. The player reported that he had received no clear answers from his assigned VIP account managers and was told to contact the compliance team. After two weeks, he was notified that his account had been frozen. He then threatened to take legal action if his deposit was not refunded. We had reached out to the casino and invited them to participate in the resolution of this complaint. The player later informed us that his case had been resolved and asked for the complaint to be closed.

The player from Argentina is having difficulties navigating a level 4 verification process. Despite having passed the level 3 verification, the player's account was suspended, and the attempts to comply with additional verification steps have been rejected and met with unresponsiveness.

The player from India had faced an issue with Stake Casino due to account suspension, which had limited his ability to bet, chat, and withdraw funds. His account verification had been under review, and despite multiple attempts to contact the casino's live support, his issue had remained unresolved. The player had used real money to play and had won a significant amount. Although the casino had claimed he could still deposit, play, and withdraw while his verification was under review, all such activities had been restricted. The player had also reported losing access to his account without any prior notice or self-exclusion request. Despite our attempts to mediate, the complaint was ultimately rejected as per the player's request received via email.

The player from India had mistakenly deposited $60,000 in Teller USD (USDT) to a Tether Bep-20 address in the casino. He had requested for the funds to be recovered but the casino had stated they were unable to do so due to the deposit being made via an unsupported network. He had requested our assistance to revisit his case due to the significant amount involved. Despite the player's attempts to provide solutions for the recovery of the funds, the casino maintained that the transaction was irreversible. We, after reviewing the case and the casino's stance, unfortunately, had to reject the complaint. We advised the player to turn to the casino's gaming authority for further assistance.

The player from India had reported that his funds had been automatically withdrawn from his casino account to an unknown account. Despite having provided all necessary information to the casino's support, he had received no assistance. He had been unaware of the transaction until he noticed his account balance was zero. He confirmed that the account to which the funds had been transferred was not his and that he had used only one payment method, UPI, for his deposits. Despite our efforts to assist, the player had failed to respond to our requests for further information. As a result, we had to reject the complaint due to lack of communication from the player's side.

A German player had reported losses of approximately €10,000 on Stake.com, a casino that allegedly did not have a license to operate in Germany. The player claimed that the casino's Know Your Customer (KYC), Customer Due Diligence (CDD), and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) processes were inadequate and violated the licensing requirements and Curaçao law. The player had been able to deposit and withdraw money without proper verification. However, we had informed the player that we could not handle complaints related to licensing regulations and policies. We also emphasized our role as a mediator in resolving disputes between players and online casinos, but we lacked the authority to enforce legal regulations. Consequently, we were unable to assist the player in this matter.

The player from Belgium had claimed that after winning 130k $ in baccarat, his account was restricted during his withdrawal attempt. He also mentioned not having received a response from the casino's support despite having an approximate balance of 260k $. However, the issue had been successfully resolved after the player contacted Stake Casino's customer support. As a result, we had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Bosnia and Herzegovina had $7400 locked in their account. Despite sending all requested documents, the casino continued to claim these documents were not visible and withheld the money. We attempted to mediate by requesting clarification from both parties. The casino insisted the documents were either missing or incorrect, while the player maintained they had sent everything as required. The complaint was ultimately rejected due to the player's lack of response to further inquiries.

The player from Bosnia and Herzegovina had experienced account lockout from Stake, despite having sent HD copies of the required KYC documents several times. The casino had accepted his level 2 verification, but later removed it and rejected levels 3 and 4. The player had tried multiple times to send new photos and documents, including PDF documents from his bank, but all were rejected. The player had failed to respond to our requests for further information, so we were unable to investigate further. The complaint was therefore rejected.

The player from Texas had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks before submitting this complaint. His money hadn't been received yet. The player also mentioned that his account had been suspended due to an accidental $15 deposit. The Complaints Team had extended the timer for resolving the issue by 7 days, but the player failed to respond. As a result, we couldn't investigate the matter further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Romania had been allowed to deposit over 10k USD and gamble on Stake Casino before their KYC verification was completed. The casino had informed them that their account was considered as a duplicate, and therefore was suspended after the KYC review had endured for a week. The player had questioned why the casino hadn't blocked the account before they wagered 50k, claiming that they had sent the KYC documents before making any deposits. However, we had clarified that a casino could close a player's account if there was no balance without any reason or explanation given. Due to these circumstances, the complaint had been rejected.

The player from the UK reported that his account had been closed without an explanation shortly after it was created. His deposited and earned funds, which totalled £15, remained within the inaccessible account. The player stated that he believed his account had been verified and he had made a deposit on the same day the account was created. However, the player did not respond to further inquiries from the Complaints Team regarding any possible evidence of account verification or potential exclusions on sister sites or licenses. As a result, we were unable to further investigate and had to reject the complaint due to lack of response from the player.

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.

The player from Lithuania had experienced difficulties with Level 3 and Level 4 verification at an online casino, despite having submitted the necessary documents. The player's documents had been repeatedly rejected, leading to an extended verification process. The player had communicated with the casino and the Complaints Team to resolve the issue. After numerous attempts and detailed instructions from the casino, the player had managed to provide the correct documents for verification. The casino had finally approved Level 3 and Level 4 verification, enabling the player to cash out their winnings. The player had thanked the Complaints Team for their assistance in resolving the issue.

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 had encountered issues with the account verification process while trying to withdraw $12.2k in winnings from Stake.com. Despite having provided 15 sets of pictures, multiple selfies, bank statements, credit card statements, and other documents for the KYC process, the player's withdrawal was continually denied. The Complaints Team had intervened and communicated with the casino, asking for clarification on the rejected documents and suggesting alternatives for verification. After a prolonged exchange, during which the casino requested additional documents and the player complied, the casino eventually lifted the restrictions on the player's account. The player confirmed the receipt of their funds but expressed dissatisfaction with the casino's service. The complaint was marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team.

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 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 requested a refund on behalf of his underage child, who had managed to deposit funds into a casino account. The case was redirected to the regulator, and it was to be updated according to their decision. The player failed to respond to follow-up messages, which led to the rejection of the complaint due to lack of communication.

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 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 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.