Winz.io Casino Review

The player from British Columbia, who had been a loyal customer of an online casino for a year, found her account abruptly closed and was also banned from Dama NV casino. She reported that the casino management had not responded to her inquiries about this issue. Her account had been verified in January 2023 and she suspected that she might have had funds in some of her 15 disabled accounts. However, she requested to close the complaint, believing that nothing would come from it. Consequently, we rejected the complaint as per her explicit request.

The player from Hungary had attempted to withdraw winnings from Winz.io Casino. After one successful withdrawal, the remaining request was denied due to a "system error". The player, who had been a VIP member for 4 years, had deposited approximately 80,000 EUR into this casino over the years and wanted to receive the rest of her winnings, around 6,000 EUR, which had been accumulated from a no-wagering bonus. The casino had claimed the bonus was provided due to a system error. The player had insisted that once bonuses were credited, they should not be removed. We had reviewed the casino's bonus terms and conditions, which stated that even no-wager bonuses must have undergone minimal wagering before withdrawal. The casino was within its rights to invalidate the promotional funds if they were not wagered as per the terms and conditions and credited due to a technical error. The player disagreed with our conclusion, but we had no choice but to reject the complaint as unjustified.

The player from Russia had had issues with withdrawals despite having passed verification. The casino support team had claimed the verification process was incomplete but had not provided further details. After the player had contacted support again, they were told to retry the withdrawal, which was successful. The player had confirmed that there were no more restrictions and the funds had reached their account.

The player from Austria had his winnings confiscated by the casino, which accused him of opposite betting while playing on a live casino game. He had reported that this action was not taken the previous week when he had used the same betting strategy but with a smaller amount. The casino had defended its actions by stating the player had violated their anti-fraud policy, which led to the confiscation of his balance and the permanent closure of his account. The player had disputed these claims and had requested proof of his alleged violation. We had invited the casino to provide evidence of the player's breach of their terms and conditions. The casino had provided evidence, which we had analyzed and discussed internally. We had advised the player to contact the Licensing Authority Curaçao Antillephone N.V. (ANT) for further assistance due to the complexity of the case. The player had not responded to our advice within the given timeframe, resulting in the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Canada reported that after consistent play and a large deposit, their casino account had been suddenly closed without explanation. The player had attempted to contact the VIP manager but was ignored, which left them without access to their funds. The player had registered their account at the beginning of the year and had submitted all required documents for verification. However, despite their efforts to communicate with the casino, they received no response. The player believed they might have been blocked or hacked as all records of their communication with the casino had disappeared from their files. Despite our efforts, we found that the casino had the authority to close accounts without providing a reason, especially if there was no real money balance on the account. Due to the account having a $0 balance at the time of closure, our options for intervention were limited, and we were unable to resolve the case in the player's favor.

The player from Baden-Württemberg had issues with depositing money into Winz.io Casino. He claimed the deposits were debited from his account but were never credited to his casino account. Despite him providing screenshots as evidence, the casino maintained that the transactions were successful. The player did not provide the requested gaming history to confirm his claims. Due to the player's lack of response, we were unable to resolve the issue and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Germany had deposited 25 euros via instant transfer to Winz.io. The money had been deducted from her bank account but wasn't credited to her casino account. Despite her attempts to resolve the issue with the casino, it had remained unresolved. We had advised her to contact her payment provider for further investigation as the casino could not assist in this matter. However, the player had failed to respond to our follow-up messages, leaving us unable to proceed with the investigation. The complaint was, therefore, rejected.

The player ''BUTCHLANCE'' participated in no wagering free spins bonus but after he finished playing with the bonus, his account got closed. When he contacted the support they told him to go through KYC process, and the player sent all required documents. In the end, the casino accused him of bonus abuse. No information since then.

The player from Germany had his account unexpectedly closed with 0.7 litecoin deposited in it, which made him unable to access his funds. He had threatened legal action against the casino. However, the casino had reopened his account, resolving the issue. The Complaints Team had marked the complaint as 'resolved' in their system.

The player from Germany had an old account deactivated, was instructed to open a new one, and won some money. However, he was unable to withdraw his winnings due to it being deemed a duplicate account. The player stated that the first account had been closed four months prior when he had requested a break from gaming. He claimed that the casino's live chat had suggested he open a new account. He also stated that he hadn't used a bonus and his winnings were from real money. The Complaints Team found it improbable that the casino would have advised the player to open a new account, which was a violation of its rules. The player confirmed that he had provided complete profile information for both accounts. However, without concrete evidence that the casino had authorized the opening of the second account, the Complaints Team was unable to assist the player in resolving the issue and had to reject the complaint.