Thor Casino Review

The player from Colombia had faced issues with Thor Casino's verification process while trying to withdraw his deposit. Despite having provided all the requested documents, the casino had continued to ask for a copy of his passport and a selfie, which he didn't possess. The player's inquiries had been consistently redirected to the casino's security department, which had been unresponsive and kept repeating the same request. However, the issue was eventually resolved when the player received his initial deposit back. We had concluded the complaint as 'resolved' after the player confirmed the successful resolution.

The player from Ireland had an issue with cashouts at an online casino. He had successfully withdrawn $650, but his attempts to withdraw $1400 and $900 were denied. The casino claimed these withdrawals violated terms, stating a maximum withdrawal limit of $50. The player provided screenshots and a timeline of events to support his case, stating he did not have an active bonus at the time of withdrawal and speculated that the terms might have been added after his successful withdrawal. However, the player later requested to close the complaint. We respected his decision and closed the complaint.

The player from Portugal had an issue with a deposit of 20 euros that had not been credited to his casino account due to a payment system issue. Despite having provided proof to the support team, his issue had remained unresolved. Eventually, the player confirmed that his balance had been updated with the deposited amount, resolving the issue.

The player from Brazil made a deposit and attempted to withdraw her winnings. The casino claims that the player attempted to create another account but the player denies this accusation. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Spain utilized the self-exclusion option at the casino due to their gambling problem. However, they received emails and promotions and found that their self-exclusion had been reopened upon requesting it through chat, leading to a relapse. They now seek a permanent closure of their account. The case was rejected because the player did not provide enough evidence to support their claims.

The player from Germany had an active self-exclusion in an associated casino due to a gambling problem. He believes that he shouldn’t have been allowed to open a new account and requests a full refund of his deposits. After careful consideration, we concluded the player was not eligible for a refund.

The player from Spain has been accused of breaching bonus terms by placing bets greater than the allowed ones. After the discussion, the casino was able to provide us with sufficient evidence of the player making larger bets than maximum and also the communication with the live chat, where they have instructed the player with this rule. We were forced to reject this complaint as unjustified.

The player from the Philippines got his account blocked after he requested a withdrawal. The casino responded and stated that the player's account was linked to multiple other accounts. The player was questioned about this but stopped responding to our messages, so the complaint was rejected.