The player was accused of a few broken rules of the casino. Their winnings were denied.
The player requested a withdrawal of £12,000 and sent all the documents needed for his account verification to the casino. Because the payout was delayed, he contacted the casino for an explanation and they said to him that he had broken a few rules of the casino. One of them was that he had used someone else's card to deposit money into the casino. The player claimed that wasn't true. No further update is available ever since.
After the player made a deposit and sent his documents for verification, his account was blocked for security check.
The player, Betwolf, made a deposit of bigger amount, then sent the necessary documents for verification to the casino but three days later, his account got blocked and all the casino told him was that it was due to a security check. When the player investigated on it, he found out that the casino belonged to a group of casinos from which he had self-excluded himself from. Therefore, it was supposed to be valid for this casino as well but they still allowed him to open an account and deposit. The casino responded by saying that they had changed the license and they were not obliged to transfer the self-excluded accounts under a new license. Then they said that the player had asked for a self-exclusion but this process has never been accomplished properly and therefore was not valid. However, the casino failed to provide relevant proofs so this complaint was found for the player. The casino offered the player to take back his deposited funds but we're not sure if they ever received them.
Extremely delayed withdrawal process for an unknown reason.
The player requested a withdrawal of €200 but two days late, they changed their mind and wanted to keep on playing so they canceled the request. After doing so, the games were no longer available to them so they decided to request a withdrawal all over again. The casino asked the player to provide documents for verification multiple times in the row, but even after that, the player didn't receive the money. They then submitted a complaint and because that didn't help to resolve their issue either, they then contacted the Malta Gaming Authority for help. There's no further information received from them yet and in the meantime, the complaint remains unresolved.
The player's account was blocked and he was accused of a fraud. The casino didn't provide sufficient evidence.
After registration, the player accepted the sign-up offer and started playing. He won and he was asked to send some documents for verification. The player provided all the necessary documents several times but after a long wait, the player was accused of collusion, cheating criminal activity and a fraud, he was asked to withdraw his deposit after which his account was blocked. After careful examination of all casino's evidence, we decided that it didn’t prove that the player used fraudulent tactics or broke T&Cs.
The player was denied of her winning due to an accusation of a fraud.
Rebecca won over £8,000 and the casino accused her of a fraudulent abusive activity. She claimed that was impossible since she read and followed all the rules accordingly. The case stayed unresolved with no further update available.
The player's winning was confiscated due to a high betting pattern was used.
Hannah's winning was confiscated due to the broken rule of the casino while she was betting over the stated limit. She felt very disappointed and claimed she had followed all the rules accordingly. The case remained unresolved.
The player's winning was confiscated due to broken term and condition of the casino.
The player requested two withdrawals, sent all the documents needed for verification and still didn't receive their payment. Later on, when they contacted the chat representative, they informed them about broken terms and conditions. The player didn't agree and claimed they played according to the rules, but it was pointless. Their winning was confiscated and their account was blocked. There is no further information available about this case.
The player, Londonkimi from the UK, requested a withdrawal and passed the document verification. Three weeks of waiting later, he was accused of a collision with another player, which he denied. The casino confiscated his winning and decided to pay him back his deposit minus the 10% for administration fees. They also told Londonkimi that they could provide him with the evidence, but he didn't wish to see it. The case remained unresolved.
The player was denied of their winning and accused of a self-exclusion at their sister casino.
The player was accused of a self-exclusion in the casino's sister site and was denied of their winning. The player claimed they only temporarily closed their account for six months but never was self-excluded. The player decided to ask the MGA (Malta Gaming Authority) for help and was still waiting for their answer. That's why the case remained unresolved.
The player joined the casino and won an amount of money. However the next day their winnings were confiscated and the account closed. The casino claimed it was due to the self-exclusion from a sister casino. The player stated they only requested a self-exclusion from other casino group and this had to be a mistake. The complaint remained unresolved. No update since then.
The player's account got closed because the casino claimed that they used to have an account with their sister casino. The player didn't recognize that these two casinos were sister sites and in between the time their address has also changed, so did their email address. The casino didn't respond to the complaint and it remains unresolved.
After depositing and wagering the welcome bonus, the player made a withdrawal request. However, all bonus winnings were confiscated and the deposit returned. The casino claimed it was due to duplicate account. The player was convinced this was a case of a stolen identity, but the casino's decision was final. No update since.
Player lost winnings due to a technical glitch and informed the casino about it. After exchanging several emails, the player was informed that the problem was on the side of the game provider. The game provider stated on a social network that the casino was responsible. The player was offered a small bonus for the trouble but remained frustrated. The casino considered the case closed. No update since then.
The player's funds were confiscated due to self-exclusion.
The player Tinozidas from Slovakia made a deposit via Trustly and started to play in the casino. Everything seemed fine until he wanted to request a withdrawal from the casino. His account was closed due to a self-exclusion at the casino's sister site and his whole winning was confiscated. The player didn't understand why was his account blocked in Casino Joy and why did they let him play at the casino. The casino replied that the player used a different name and email address but they still found out it was him. There is no further information available and the case remained unresolved.