Wildz Casino Review

The player from Germany had experienced an unexpected account suspension and was unsure of the cause. The Complaints Team had reached out to the player asking for additional information to better understand the situation and had proposed extending the timeline for a response. However, due to the lack of response from the player to the team's messages and questions, the complaint had been rejected. The team had been unable to proceed with any further investigation or provide potential solutions without the necessary information from the player.

The player from Hesse had initially struggled with account verification because the casino did not accept his bank statement and proof of card ownership. Despite these struggles, he was able to verify his account. However, he then encountered a new issue where the casino refused to pay out to his Paysfe account or accept his virtual MasterCard for withdrawal. The casino had requested a German IBAN, which he had provided but had received no response. Despite his daily communication with the casino, all his withdrawal attempts had been cancelled. We had advised the player that withdrawal methods might differ from deposit methods and asked him to choose from the available options. However, the player did not respond to our queries and suggestions, leading us to reject the complaint due to a lack of further information.

The player from Germany had encountered an issue where his account had been locked after he deposited money, played games, and received free spins. The disputed amount was €20, which the player claimed he had won using the free spin bonus. Despite attempts from our team to understand the situation and resolve the issue, the player did not respond to our messages and questions. As a result, we were unable to proceed with the investigation, leading to the complaint being rejected.

The player from New Zealand had a dispute over withdrawal of funds. Despite having provided wage information, government pay, tax return, and bank statements as proof of source of wealth to Wildz Casino, the casino continued to deny the withdrawal and requested additional documentation. At that time, $1000 was locked in the account. Our team had reached out to the player for additional information and extended the response deadline by 7 days. Unfortunately, due to the player's lack of response, we were unable to further investigate and had to reject the complaint.

A player from Brazil is having trouble with the casino accepting his proof of address documents. Even when providing documents like utility bills and bank statements, they were all rejected. Additionally, the casino has rejected a previously accepted document from the player's MuchBetter account, demanding the transaction made at the casino be shown on it, which is impossible due to statement time limitations. We contacted the casino, and its representative informed us about a necessaty to provide other documents for the verification. Due to complience reasons, Wildz requested another document for identity verification and proof of address. Unfortunately, the player wasn't able to provide other documents than their national ID and utility bills, therefore the casino couldn't proceed with the verification and agreed to return the deposits in full. The player confirmed receiving the money back. In the end, we rejected the complaint.

The player from New Zealand used a friend's card for deposit. However, the account was blocked when the casino discovered this, as the friend couldn't provide any ID for verification. We closed the complaint because the player didn't reply to our messages and questions.

The player from New Zealand had their account at Wildz closed and $800 withheld due to a suspected violation of terms and conditions, despite having a jointly-owned bank account. They tried to validate their identity with various documents but the casino did not accept them.

The player from Brazil was experiencing difficulty with the verification process as the casino was rejecting his Brazilian National ID and requesting a driver's license or passport, which the player does not possess. Later, the casino representative informed us that the complainant's ID was accepted, and he was asked to provide additional documents to prove his address. Once the KYC was completed, the player's disputed funds were successfully paid out after approximately 1 month, probably due to additional checks of the disputed account. The complaint is resolved.

The player from Germany had his account blocked after accumulating a substantial win. We ended up rejecting the complaint because it was not justified as the player failed to prove the ownership of the accounts he made deposits from.

The player from Canada was prompted to provide additional documents for the KYC, even if her account seemed to be verified in the past. The player managed to verify her her account and withdraw the funds. The complaint was closed as "resolved".

The player from New Zealand has requested a withdrawal. Unfortunately, the payment seems to be delayed. We rejected the complaint twice because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Canada had been blocked after making a deposit. The Casino responded and stated that the reason the account had been blocked was due to a name mismatch on the payment method details. The bank statements that the player provided were missing their legal name. The casino further stated that the account had since been verified and reopened. This was confirmed with the player, and so the issue was resolved.

The player from Germany has deposited funds into their account from their wife’s credit card. The casino blocked the player. Since this was against the General T&Cs, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from Malta made a deposit and she was supposed to receive a bonus. However, she was informed that she isn't eligible for it, so she asked for a deposit refund. The casino has informed us about processing a refund, however the player stopped responding and we were not able to get any confirmation from the player, therefore the complaint was rejected.

The player from Canada was experiencing difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to ongoing verification. He wasn't able to provide a requisite document, seemingly due to objective reasons. The casino refused to discuss the case with our service and therefore, the player contacted the regulatory body of the casino. Two years later, as the player never updated us on the matter, we reached out to the player and inquired about the official complaint. Since we haven't received any response from the player, the complaint was closed as 'Rejected'.

The player from Canada is complaining that the casino asks for personal information during the KYC. Since the player refused to send the documents and then stopped responding to this complaint, we rejected it.

The player from Finland experienced a technical glitch with one of the games. We rejected the complaint because the player experienced the same issue with this specific game in various casinos, therefore the issue clearly is not with the casino.

The player from Canada had her account blocked without further explanation. The casino informed us that the reason for blocking the player's account was a breach of rules 5.2, 8.14, and 8.15 from the Terms and Conditions. The casino did not provide evidence to support their claims, therefore we recommended the player file an official complaint with the casino's Licensing Authority. The player did not confirm that she filed a complaint with the Licensing Authority and stopped responding to our messages. The complaint was, therefore, closed as 'rejected'.

The player from Germany had her account blocked and withdrawal delayed without further explanation. The casino has failed to respond to this complaint and we were forced to close it as 'unresolved'. Even after reopening of this complaint the issue was not resolved and the casino failed to respond again.

The player from Canada has been struggling to receive her winnings for more than three weeks. Even though we assumed that the issue has been resolved, without a confirmation from the player, we were forced to reject this complaint.

The player from Germany had his account closed and winnings confiscated after accusation of providing false data. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Canada has requested a withdrawal. Unfortunately, it has been delayed due to ongoing account verification. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.

The player from Norway had accumulated 270,000 NOK after completing the wagering requirements on Spinz.com and initiated a withdrawal of 20,000 NOK. Despite having completed the KYC process on May 20th, the withdrawal had not been received, and support responses had been unhelpful. After intervention from the Complaints Team, the player confirmed that he received 20,000 NOK, and subsequently, he was able to withdraw an additional 80,000 NOK. The issue was then considered resolved, with only 30,000 NOK remaining to withdraw.

The player from Finland submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us. Winnings haven’t been obtained up to this day. The player later confirmed that the withdrawal was processed successfully, therefore we marked this complaint as resolved.

The player from Finland had initiated a €150 withdrawal on December 13, 2024, but had not received the funds. Despite being advised to wait by customer service, he was informed during his third inquiry that the casino had contacted Brite, the payment provider. The withdrawal showed as approved, but the player had not received confirmation, and his account reflected €0 withdrawals for that day. The issue was resolved when the player confirmed that the withdrawal had arrived in his bank account, indicating that the fault lay with the payment provider Brite. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Finland had initially experienced difficulties withdrawing his winnings due to ongoing verification. The main issue had been related to verifying his home address as he used a posterestante address. After submitting the required documents and providing additional address information, the player had been able to receive his winnings. However, his account remained closed until he could provide a non-posterestante address. The complaint had been closed as 'resolved' following the successful withdrawal of winnings.

The player from Canada had made a deposit mistake which had led to her account being blocked until verification. Despite her numerous attempts to verify residency with documents other than a utility bill, her documents had been continually rejected and her deposit had been retained since April 26th. The Complaints Team had intervened to clarify the importance of KYC procedures and asked for more information to assist in resolving her issue. The player later confirmed that her problem had been resolved. Consequently, we had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Finland had been unable to access her locked casino account at Wheelz Casino and withdraw her 100€ winnings. Despite having previously successfully withdrawn smaller amounts, her account got locked during an attempt to withdraw a larger amount, with the casino's customer service accusing her of misuse. Following the player's interaction with the Complaints Team and the casino, her account had been reopened and she had been promised her winnings. However, there had been delays in the payment, which led the player to lose trust in the casino. Eventually, the casino paid out the winnings, resolving the issue.

The player from South Africa has submitted false personal data when registering the account. Subsequently, the player's account was deactivated when a friend has logged into her account from the same device.