WinSpirit Casino Review

The player from Rhineland-Palatinate had wanted to know how to close the account for a break and a misunderstanding had led to the immediate locking of their account by the casino representative. Upon reopening, €318 from the account were missing, and the player had been informed that a refund had been initiated, and they had to wait up to 10 days. We had confirmed that the player's account was reopened and that the refund was in process. Despite initial frustration over the wait time for the refund, the player had confirmed receipt of the funds and the issue had been resolved.

The player from Ontario had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting her complaint. Her money hadn't been received yet. However, before the Complaints Team could intervene, the player had informed them that the casino had paid out her winnings. Therefore, the issue had been successfully resolved without the need for further action.

The player from Canada could not withdraw $4,000 in winnings due to issues with verifying a virtual card issued by a Canadian Bank. Despite attempts to provide proof of ownership, the casino had insisted on documentation the issuing bank declined to provide due to security concerns. The player eventually played out all the winnings while waiting for the bank to issue a physical card. The player alleged a malfunction in the betting system, but the casino maintained that no such error occurred. The casino offered goodwill bonuses to the player but the winnings still remained unclaimed. The complaint was rejected as the player had already used up all her winnings before the issue could be resolved.

The player from Canada was facing issues with the Playson game provider in the casino Win Spirit. After some initial winnings and withdrawals, all Playson games were only loading a black screen. The player also reported a loss of coins during the technical difficulties, but after some back and forth with the casino, she decided to discontinue the complaint. We closed the complaint as per her request.

The player from Australia had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, her payout hadn't been received yet. The delay had been attributed by the casino to issues with the payment system. The casino had assured that the withdrawal was approved and that the funds should have been in the player's account. We had kept the complaint open for an additional week awaiting the player's confirmation of receiving the funds. However, due to the lack of response from the player, we were compelled to reject the complaint.

The player from Algeria had unsuccessfully tried to withdraw their money twice over the previous 7 weeks. The player claimed that the withdrawal had been attempted towards the same card used for deposit, but the casino insisted that all cards used for deposit had to be verified. After multiple exchanges, the player had decided to give up on the withdrawal and expressed dissatisfaction with the casino's policies. The complaint was subsequently rejected by the complaints team due to the player's explicit request and lack of cooperation in resolving the issue.

The player from Canada had discovered that his casino account balance decreased from $140 to $0 overnight, even though he hadn't gambled the money away. The Complaints Team had asked for additional information and the casino had claimed to have resolved the issue by re-issuing the player's first deposit bonus. However, without confirmation from the player, we had been forced to reject the complaint, even if it was assumed that the issue had been resolved.

The player from Australia is facing delays in withdrawing his winnings of $800AUD, despite having completed multiple verification processes and previous successful withdrawals. The complaint was rejected as the player stopped responding.

The player from Canada had requested self-exclusion due to heavy losses but instead of taking action, his account manager had encouraged him to rethink his decision. This delay in self-exclusion had led to further deposits totaling in excess of CAD $30,000, at least CAD $20,000 of which were made after the self-exclusion request. The casino had acknowledged its responsibility regarding self-exclusion provisions and decided to refund the full sum of deposits made under the player's account since the latest closure request. However, due to the player's failure to respond to our messages, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Germany had won and tried to withdraw €1,100 but was informed that his account had been blocked due to a supposed previous request to close the account, a claim he denied. The player admitted to having self-excluded from other casinos but insisted not from this one. The casino acknowledged an internal error and promised to reopen the player's account and credit his winnings within a week. Subsequently, the player confirmed receipt of his winnings, and we closed the complaint as resolved.