I'm sorry, but I'm still quite convinced you expect the casino to pay for the issue described in your previously rejected complaint. It almost seems the casino agrees with the rejection and is not willing to discuss the issue further, even with you.
May I know what makes you believe the casino is still obliged to press this matter forward, please?
I'm referring to this situation:
"If a casino allows players from a certain country to deposit and play, they should pay their legitimate winnings. By the same principle, if a player deposits in a casino and loses, the player is not eligible for a refund.
We can't penalize casinos if they lack any particular license.
After gathering all the information, this complaint will now be rejected."
Perhaps the first one👈 holds the explanation?
"As I explained previously, casinos can close players' accounts whenever and for whatever reason as long as no funds have been confiscated in the process. We would really like to help, but it is impossible for us under these circumstances.
Due to the aforementioned reasons, this complaint will now be rejected. "
Under these circumstances, I would love to understand what kind of response you're expecting. Help me understand that, please.
I believe the matter of forum posts and user reviews is accordingly flowing in the other thread, so if you don't mind, I won't repeat myself here.
On the other hand, we believe that gambling is a way to exchange money for the thrill of the game, so if players tend to write negative reviews because they keep losing and hence the games must be fake, it actually says very little about the casino's qualities since the games are just a bought product. Gambling is very much about losing.
The same goes for situations where the player writes a negative review to say the casino is fraud because the withdrawal is taking more than 24 hours.
We consider a delay to start by the 4th day. Despite that, though, we also consider the complexity of the review and do our best to approve most of them. Every review providing at least some information worth sharing is very likely to be approved. However, we had to set at least a few concrete guidelines to ensure the reviews will be approached more or less the same way. I agree with you; it is a very delicate matter.
In my opinion, it is not a good idea to play slots without visible RTP; this could partially be the reason for the lowered Safety Index, by the way. Have you heard the recommendations we present for fair casinos?
https://casino.guru/fair-gambling-codex-for-casinos#transparency 👈
If you have doubts regarding the games fairness, I suggest you contact the licensing authority. That's the only competent ruling body in that particular matter.
Du omdirigeres til casinoets website. Vent et øjeblik. Tjek indstillingerne, hvis du bruger software til annonceblokering.