TrustDice Casino Review

The player from Morocco had protested the closure of his account on trustdice.win without his identity being verified. He had won a total of $1,135 and had tried to withdraw $400 before his account was suspended without explanation or opportunity for resolution. He was eager to provide any necessary identification documents. However, upon investigation, the casino had provided evidence of the player having multiple accounts, which was a violation of their terms and conditions. As a result, we had to reject the player's complaint due to the evidence provided by the casino. The player insisted on his innocence but the evidence provided by the casino was conclusive.

The player from Russia had been gambling at an online casino, using various cryptocurrencies. After substantial losses, the player had started winning and had total funds of approximately 8000 USD. Upon attempting to withdraw these winnings, the player was asked to verify their account, which they did. However, following the completed KYC process, the casino confiscated the player's winnings and closed their account. The casino had cited suspected card counting and potential use of software to aid gameplay as the reason for account closure and fund confiscation. The player had denied these accusations and claimed that the casino's actions were unfair. We had reviewed the evidence provided by the casino and found it sufficient to support their claims that additional software had been used by the player. Consequently, the complaint was rejected. The player had been advised to escalate the matter to the casino's regulatory authority if desired.

The player from Brazil was unable to play due to geographical restrictions, despite having made a deposit. The provided solutions didn't solve the problem. The withdrawal of funds was being delayed until further deposit and wagering requirement, which the player found nonsensical. We extended the complaint's timer and requested additional information from the player. However, due to the player's lack of response, we were unable to further investigate the issue and had to reject the complaint.

A player from the United Kingdom had his account blocked and his deposit of £450 plus £4000 winnings confiscated after requesting a withdrawal. Despite multiple attempts to reach customer support, he has received no response. He was also participating in a dice tournament at the time of the incident. After reviewing the facts of the case we concluded the complaint was unjustified.

The player from Ontario had encountered an issue with bonus use, having won a significant amount in BTC after wagering with the bonus and personal funds. However, the winnings had been confiscated as they exceeded the maximum limit for bonus returns. The player had contested that the winnings came from normal play, not exclusively bonus use. The Complaints Team, after reviewing the betting history provided by the casino and the casino's bonus terms and conditions, concluded that the player had spent his real funds in the wagering of the free spins winnings before winning the larger amount using bonus funds. Thus, the winnings had been correctly limited to the maximum win amount as outlined in the bonus terms. The player was not satisfied with this explanation, but the Complaints Team had maintained that the case was handled according to the rules.

The player from the US had experienced difficulties depositing tether to the casino, even though they had a transaction hash proving the deposit was made. The player claimed that it had been their first deposit and they had used the erc-20 tether on the BNB network. The casino's representative had indicated that the player used an unsupported network for the deposit, leading to the loss of funds. The casino also mentioned that they had a clear disclaimer about the risk of losing funds if sent through the wrong network. Despite the player's insistence on the validity of their transactions, we concluded that the deposits had been made on an unsupported network, and the funds were irretrievable.

The player from the United Kingdom experienced an issue with Immersive Roulette on Trustdice Casino. Despite placing winning bets, they were rejected after the spins. Even with strong evidence presented, Trustdice refused to compensate for the wins, only returning the initial bets. The player seeks fairness and compensation for the winning bets. The complaint was resolved as the casino compensated the player.

The player from Tunisia has a winning balance of approximately 230 USD in BTC. The player completed the requested KYC process and attempted to withdraw, but the withdrawal was repeatedly cancelled. After several attempts to understand the issue, the player was presented with further KYC requirements, including a video call via Zoom. The player believes this is a tactic to avoid paying winnings. The complaint was rejected as the player did not comply with the casino's requirement of video call verification.

The player from Romania deposited $100 and managed to accumulate winnings. However, their withdrawal request was declined even after completing additional verification steps including a selfie, a passport picture, and a video call, and isn't getting any response for 3 days. The complaint was rejected because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player struggles to withdraw his money due ongoing verification. The casino provided sufficient evidence to suggest that the documents provided by the player had been edited. Consequently the complaint was rejected.

The player from Latvia had his winnings confiscated due to an unsuccessful verification process. Upon closer investigation, it was found that there were also sufficient grounds to believe that the player was in breach of the Terms and Conditions. There were multiple irregular connections between his gaming account and other gaming accounts. After a thorough review of all provided information and evidence, we believe that the casino's decision was justified in this case. The player's complaint was rejected as 'Unjustified'.

The player's account was blocked and the remaining balance was withheld during the verification process due to found inconsistencies in the provided documentation. After a thorough review of the evidence provided by the casino team, we understood the existing suspicions but believed that the verification process should not have been concluded. The casino team took further steps to verify the player's identity and in the end, the player successfully passed the verification process. The complaint was closed as 'Resolved' after the player confirmed they had received their winnings.

The player from the United Kingdom is experiencing difficulties withdrawing his remaining balance and had his winnings from sports betting voided without further explanation. We rejected this complaint as it was sports betting related.

The player from Poland had their winnings cancelled without further explanation. The casino offered a deposit refund and the player accepted it. The complaint is closed as resolved based on the player's confirmation.