Wazbee Casino - Spilleren har identifikationsproblemer med casinoet.

: "I provided an Estonian Residence Permit. My residence is Estonia, which is a permitted jurisdiction. The casino is wrongly identifying me as a Ukrainian resident based on my origin/citizenship."

Important notice:

Casino Guru will never ask for payments or access to your accounts to complete KYC. If someone claims to be from Casino Guru and does that, do not share any information.

We only contact players through this official complaint thread or via @casino.guru e-mail addresses. Always check the sender’s domain and verify your complaint resolver’s e-mail address by clicking on their avatar visible inside the official complaint thread.

If anything seems suspicious, contact us directly.

Stay safe.

Hello,

Thank you very much for submitting your complaint. I’m sorry to hear about your negative experience with Wazbee Casino.

Please allow me to ask you a few questions so I can better understand the situation.

• Could you please explain when the incident happened? Was your account closed as a result of the accusations made against you?
• Since when have you lived in Estonia? When was the residence permit issued, and when did you register in the casino?
• Have you filled out your player's profile with the information about your address from the residence permit?
• Did you achieve your current balance with the help of a bonus?
• Could you please share with me your communication with the casino regarding the issue? Send emails or chat transcripts to my email at tomas@casino.guru, or post screenshots here

I hope we will be able to help you resolve this issue as soon as possible. Thank you very much in advance for your reply.

Best regards,

Tomas

Hello yuriim,

We would like to update you that due to Tomas, your designated resolver, being on vacation, we have opted to extend the timeline by an additional 7 days. Since Tomas has an in-depth understanding of your situation and maintains direct communication with the casino, we find this extension justified. Your patience is sincerely appreciated, and I assure you that Tomas will contact you at the earliest opportunity.

Thank you for your understanding and ongoing patience.

Best regards, Casino Guru

Dear yuriim,

Thank you for your cooperation and for providing all the necessary information. I truly appreciate the time and effort you’ve taken to share everything with us so far.

Your complaint will now move to the next stage of our process and be handled by your dedicated Resolver, Michal (michal.v@casino.guru). This is a standard step in our procedure, as the Resolver will take over communication with the casino directly and manage your case from this point onward.

No action is required from you right now. Your Resolver will reach out through this thread if any additional details are needed. You can rest assured that your case is in very capable hands.

I wish you the best of luck and hope your case will be resolved to your satisfaction soon.

Kind regards,

Tomas

Hello yuriim,

My name is Michal, and I will be assisting you with your case. I hope that together we will come to a successful resolution of your issue.

I would like to request the presence of a representative from the casino in this conversation.

Dear Wazbee Casino,

Could you possibly provide additional information regarding the issue and clarify the situation? I would also appreciate it if you provided us with any and all relevant evidence.

Thank you in advance.

Respectfully,

Michal

Hello!

Thank you for your patience.

During the verification of the client’s identity and address, it was found that an Estonian document "Elamisluba" with a temporary permit was uploaded.

The document states Ukrainian citizenship.

Elamisluba is an Estonian residence permit document that confirms a person has the legal right to live in Estonia for a certain period of time.

According to the Terms and Conditions:

2.4. Residents and citizens of the following territories are restricted to use and access wazbee.casino by any means including but not limited to: <...> Ukraine <...>

Dear Wazbee Casino,

Thank you for your response. I would like to respectfully clarify a point regarding the player in question. If the player is legally residing in Estonia, has registered with the casino while in Estonia, and indicated this information on the registration form, I fail to see the relevance of the player’s Ukrainian citizenship in this context. Given that the player is a resident of Estonia, this should indeed be the country selected on the registration form. Also, in the email that you've sent to the player, it is incorrectly stated that he is a resident of Ukraine, since he is a resident of Estonia. Furthermore, I have concerns that if the player had chosen not to submit a withdrawal request and subsequently lost all his funds, his account may not have faced closure. Only when they tried to withdraw was their account blocked. I would like to kindly ask you to reconsider your decision to close the player's account and to confiscate their winnings.

Hello,

First of all, we would like to emphasize that the account was not restricted based on the player’s citizenship as such. The key factor in this case relates to game provider restrictions and compliance obligations, which are applied independently from the player’s country of residence.

As outlined in the Terms and Conditions, access to certain game providers may be limited due to legal, contractual, or compliance-related requirements . In particular, some providers (including Pragmatic Play) impose restrictions based on jurisdictional and risk parameters, which must be enforced by the operator (also regarding the citizens of Ukraine).

During a routine post-withdrawal review, it was identified that:

- the player had engaged with games from multiple providers, including those with specific jurisdictional limitations;

- part of the gameplay involved providers that apply restricted country rules, regardless of the player’s declared residence;

- additional risk indicators were triggered during the withdrawal stage, which required a deeper compliance review.

It is important to note that such reviews are typically conducted at the withdrawal stage, in line with standard industry practice, where full verification and provider-level checks are performed.

Following this review, the account was restricted due to a combination of provider restrictions and internal compliance considerations, rather than a single factor.

I disagree with the casino's position for the following reasons:

1. Casino technical liability. The casino claims I played games from providers with territorial restrictions. However, modern gaming platforms are required to programmatically block access to games (geo-block) if they are prohibited in the player's region. If the casino allowed me to launch the game, place a bet, and accept it, it thereby confirmed the legitimacy of my actions. As a player, I cannot and am not obligated to know all the internal legal agreements between the casino and its dozens of providers.
2. Verification only at the withdrawal stage (Double Standards). The casino cites "standard practice" for verification during withdrawals. However, this looks like an attempt to avoid paying out winnings. Why didn't these "violations" prevent the casino from accepting my deposits and allowing me to lose money on the same games? If providers are restricted, access to them should be blocked immediately, not after a player wins.
3. The spot check is unfair. The casino only reports violations when I win. However, my previous deposits were also lost on these same games. If I "broke" the rules by playing them, then why were my losing bets accepted?
4. No malicious intent. I have completed verification and provided honest information about my citizenship and place of residence. I did not use any means of circumventing blocking (VPN) to deceive the system. If the casino system allowed me to play, it means it considered me a suitable player.

I ask Casino Guru to take into account that the error in the game access settings lies with the operator (casino), and this should not be grounds for confiscation and closure of the account.

Я не согласен с позицией казино по следующим причинам:

1. Техническая ответственность казино. Казино утверждает, что я играл в игры провайдеров, которые имеют территориальные ограничения. Однако современные игровые платформы обязаны программно блокировать доступ к играм (гео-блок), если они запрещены в регионе игрока. Если казино позволило мне запустить игру, сделать ставку и принять её, оно тем самым подтвердило легитимность моих действий. Я, как игрок, не могу и не обязан знать все внутренние юридические соглашения между казино и десятками их провайдеров.
2. Проверка только на этапе вывода (Double Standards). Казино ссылается на "стандартную практику" проверки при выводе средств. Однако это выглядит как попытка избежать выплаты выигрыша. Почему эти "нарушения" не помешали казино принимать мои депозиты и позволять мне проигрывать деньги в тех же самых играх? Если провайдеры ограничены, доступ к ним должен закрываться сразу, а не после того, как игрок выиграл.
3. Несправедливость выборочной проверки. Казино заявляет о нарушениях только в момент выигрыша. Однако мои предыдущие депозиты также проигрывались в этих же играх. Если я "нарушал" правила, играя в них, то почему мои проигрышные ставки принимались
4. Отсутствие злого умысла. Я прошел верификацию, предоставил честные данные о своем гражданстве и месте проживания. Я не использовал средства обхода блокировок (VPN), чтобы обмануть систему. Если система казино допустила меня к играм, значит, она признала меня подходящим игроком.

Я прошу Casino Guru учесть, что ошибка в настройках доступа к играм лежит на стороне оператора (казино), и это не должно быть поводом для конфискации и закрытия аккаунта. 

Dear Wazbee Casino,

Have you received any kind of notification or a warning from the mentioned game provider that the player's citizenship is an issue?

Dear Michal,

We are not entirely sure we understood your question correctly. Could you please rephrase it?

Dear Wazbee Casino,

I apologize if my previous question was unclear. I would appreciate it if you could provide more information regarding the restrictions imposed by game providers. Specifically, I would ask you to share with us the specific policies concerning the restriction of player access based on citizenship rather than residency.

We would like to ask the casino to reply to this complaint. We are extending the timer by 7 days. If the casino fails to respond in the set time frame, we will close the complaint as ‘unresolved’ which may negatively affect its rating.

Hello!

At the time of registration, the player selected Estonia as their country of residence. At that stage, the player’s citizenship was neither declared nor verified, as full KYC verification and document review are conducted during the withdrawal verification process in accordance with our standard compliance procedures.

The player’s Ukrainian citizenship became known to us only after the withdrawal request was submitted and the supporting identification documents were reviewed by the relevant compliance team.

Regarding the request for "specific policies concerning the restriction of player access based on citizenship rather than residency" we would like to clarify the following:

1. As the casino operator, we are bound by a commercial agreement with Pragmatic Play for the provision of gaming content and related services. Due to contractual confidentiality obligations, we are not in a position to disclose the agreement itself or internal contractual documentation. However, we can confirm that under this agreement, the provider expressly restricts access to its gaming content for persons connected to certain prohibited jurisdictions. These restrictions are not limited exclusively to residency and apply based on the provider’s compliance framework where any relevant connection to a restricted jurisdiction may trigger prohibition. Ukraine is included in the provider’s restricted jurisdictions list.

2. In addition, our website Terms and Conditions, which the player expressly accepted during registration, clearly state that certain games and services may be unavailable or prohibited for citizens and/or residents of restricted jurisdictions in accordance with provider restrictions and licensing requirements. By creating the account and accepting the Terms, the player acknowledged and agreed to these conditions.

Therefore, once the player’s Ukrainian citizenship became known during the KYC verification process, we became contractually obligated to enforce the applicable provider restrictions and prevent access to the relevant gaming content, since the citizenship is the key determinant in order to confirm the access for clients in relation with Ukraine.

This was not a discretionary decision made by the operator, but a mandatory compliance action required under our contractual obligations with the game provider and under the Terms accepted by the player upon registration.

I would like to specifically highlight how the casino's own Terms & Conditions regarding Pragmatic Play completely debunk their defense:

1. Pragmatic Play Rules Disprove the Ban

As seen in the screenshots of Wazbee Casino's official Terms & Conditions, Ukraine is NOT on the "Blocked countries" list for Pragmatic Play. It is explicitly listed under "Restricted countries". Crucially, Estonia (my country of residence) is in the exact same "Restricted" category. In the iGaming industry, "Restricted" status implies limitations on specific games, not a total ban or grounds for balance confiscation.

2. Restrictions Apply Only to Dice Games, Not Regular Slots

The rules clearly show that Pragmatic Play's restrictions only apply to specific branded slots or "Dice" versions of games (which are available exclusively in a few countries like Brazil, Russia, South Korea, etc.). I do not remember the exact names of all the slots I played, as I opened various games. However, since the casino has full access to my betting history, the burden of proof is on them. If they claim I violated the rules, let them provide my game logs to prove I won the money on those specific forbidden Dice games. If I played regular slots, their defense completely collapses.

3. Unfair "Freeroll" Practice

The casino admits that it did not implement any technical restrictions during my registration or gameplay. They willingly accepted my real-money deposits and allowed my bets to process. The block and confiscation happened only when I requested a withdrawal. According to fair play standards, if a provider has restrictions, the casino must implement a technical geo-block at the entry point of the game. Allowing a player to risk their own funds, but canceling the balance only if they win, is an unacceptable "freeroll" practice by the operator.

I kindly ask the Casino Guru team to review these terms and rule in my favor, as the casino is clearly misinterpreting its own rules to avoid paying out.

Subject: Additional Evidence: Casino's "VPN Friendly" Policy Contradicts Balance Confiscation

I would like to provide critical new evidence that completely disproves the casino’s defense.

As seen in the attached screenshot from the main page of wazbee88.casino, the operator openly advertises itself as a "VPN friendly" platform.

By publicizing a "VPN friendly" status, the casino actively encourages players to use virtual networks, which inherently bypass any technical geo-blocks or software restrictions implemented by game providers like Pragmatic Play.

This creates a severe conflict of interest and constitutes a clear case of "free-rolling":

The casino invites players to use VPNs to register, deposit real money, and play any available games without any restriction at the entry point.

If the player loses, the casino keeps the money.

If the player wins, the casino initiates a strict compliance check regarding the player's citizenship or residency to void the winnings based on the provider's rules.

The casino cannot encourage the bypass of restrictions on its homepage and then use those exact same restrictions as a ground for balance confiscation during a withdrawal request. This is an unfair and predatory practice aimed solely at avoiding legitimate payouts.

I kindly ask the Casino Guru team to take this misleading promotional policy into account and rule in my favor.

Dear Casino Guru Team,

I would like to update you and the mediator on the latest steps I have taken regarding this case.

Due to the severe contradiction between Wazbee Casino's marketing policy and their strict enforcement of provider rules, I have officially contacted Pragmatic Play's Compliance Department(compliance@pragmaticplay.com).

I have submitted a formal report to the game provider regarding how Wazbee Casino is using Pragmatic Play’s brand guidelines as a retroactive excuse to confiscate €5,099 of my winnings. I specifically highlighted that the casino officially authorizes and permits VPN usage for game access under Paragraph 3.3 of their own Terms & Conditions, which directly bypasses the provider's automated geo-blocks and creates a clear case of "free-rolling."

I am currently awaiting a formal compliance review from Pragmatic Play. Furthermore, I have also escalated this matter directly to the Curaçao Gaming Authority (CGA) under License No: OGL/2024/600/0262.

I kindly ask the Casino Guru team to keep this thread open while these official regulatory and provider investigations are ongoing.

Dear yuriim,

Thank you for the updates. Could you kindly send me a confirmation that you have contacted the regulator? Please forward the email to michal.v@casino.guru. I will be waiting to hear from you.

Dear Michal, I have forwarded all the required confirmations and screenshots of my inquiries to your email address (michal.v@casino.guru). Currently, I have officially filed a complaint with the Curaçao Gaming Authority (CGA) and contacted the Pragmatic Play compliance department. The official inquiry has been registered, and I am now awaiting their response and decision on my case

Dear Wazbee Casino,

I appreciate the clarification provided regarding the recent situation. However, I must express my concerns, as the current approach does not appear to prioritize the well-being of players. Initially, the email sent to the player indicated that their account was closed due to residency in Ukraine, which was incorrect, as they were actually residing in Estonia. Subsequently, it was communicated that both residency and citizenship are factors in this matter. Unfortunately, without any supporting evidence, these statements lead us to believe that these restrictions are imposed by the gaming provider and that the operator is obligated to enforce them. If this is indeed the situation, I regret to inform you that the implementation of these restrictions does not align with the principles we consider essential for casinos to earn a "Fair and Safe" badge. For your reference, here are the criteria that are assessed when determining the awards for such badges: https://casino.guru/guide/fair-and-safe-badges

Furthermore, I would like to emphasize that the enforcement of restrictions seems inconsistent with the status of being a "VPN friendly" casino. In a truly fair and safe gaming environment, players should not have access to games they are not permitted to play. If certain games are restricted due to residency, these games ought to be blocked at the software level. If the restriction is based on citizenship rather than residency (which is quite rare), then only games without restrictions should be accessible to the player until the KYC process is completed. Following that, additional games could be unlocked based on the KYC outcome.

Therefore, if we do not reach a successful resolution of this issue, I will be forced to reevaluate the validity of the "Fair and Safe" badge awarded to Wazbee Casino. Please let me know how you wish to proceed.

We would like to ask the casino to reply to this complaint. We are extending the timer by 7 days. If the casino fails to respond in the set time frame, we will close the complaint as ‘unresolved’ which may negatively affect its rating.

Dear Michal,

We are currently reviewing the case and will get back to you with an update.

Thank you for your patience.

Dear Wazbee Casino,

Thank you for your continuous attention to this case. We are waiting for your reply.

We would like to ask the casino to reply to this complaint. We are extending the timer by 7 days. If the casino fails to respond in the set time frame, we will close the complaint as ‘unresolved’ which may negatively affect its rating.

???

Dear Wazbee Casino,

Based on our previous interactions, I am confident that you are open to continuing our discussion and addressing my concerns. As such, I would like to set a final timer for resolution. I remain optimistic that we can successfully settle this dispute and that the absence of a response from your end over the past two weeks was merely an oversight.

Dear Michal,

We understand Casino Guru's focus on player protection and transparency, and we would like to provide additional factual context regarding this case.

First and foremost, the restriction in question was not introduced at the Operator's discretion. The games supplied by Pragmatic Play are contractually and technically subject to territorial restrictions determined by the game provider and implemented through our platform provider.

Specifically:

- Ukraine is a restricted jurisdiction for Pragmatic Play.

- In addition, because we operate through a third-party aggregation platform, the platform provider has imposed an additional restriction requiring Estonia to be blocked for Pragmatic Play games. In accordance with those contractual requirements, we implemented this restriction. Should Casino Guru require verification of this fact, we are prepared to provide supporting evidence directly and confidentially.

Accordingly, these restrictions are not arbitrary business decisions made by the Operator, but rather contractual and technical obligations imposed by our upstream suppliers. Failure to comply with such requirements would constitute a breach of our contractual obligations and could jeopardize our continued access to gaming content.

Our project may generally be described as VPN-friendly only in the sense that we do not prohibit players from using a VPN solely to access our website where such access is otherwise unavailable from their location. However, this should not be interpreted as permitting or encouraging the use of VPN services to circumvent territorial restrictions imposed by game providers or platform suppliers.

Once the relevant information became available during our verification process, we were contractually obligated to enforce the applicable supplier restrictions. We cannot knowingly allow continued access to content where our suppliers prohibit such access, irrespective of whether the restriction originates from the game provider itself or from the aggregation platform through which those games are supplied.

For this reason, we respectfully disagree with the suggestion that our actions demonstrate unfair treatment of the player. On the contrary, the Operator acted consistently with its contractual obligations and in accordance with the technical limitations imposed by its licensed suppliers and platform provider. Ignoring these restrictions would have exposed the Operator to contractual violations and potential regulatory and commercial consequences.

We hope this additional context clarifies that this matter concerns compliance with mandatory third-party contractual requirements rather than a discretionary decision by the Operator.

Should Casino Guru wish to review the documentary evidence confirming the platform provider's territorial restrictions, we would be pleased to provide it on a confidential basis.

Dear Wazbee Casino,

Thank you for the reply and for your continued attention to this case. As you have offered, I would like to kindly ask you to provide me with the mentioned evidence. Please send everything to michal.v@casino.guru.

I would like to ask if the player registered from Estonia and chose to play Pragmatic Play games, would these be restricted on a software level, forcing the player to use a VPN, or are they available without any software restrictions?

Dear Michal,

We are currently preparing a detailed response, together with the relevant supporting information and documentation for this specific case.

To ensure that the information provided is accurate and properly verified, we require additional time to collect and confirm the necessary details with the relevant providers. Our response will specifically address the technical restrictions applicable to Pragmatic Play games for players registered in Estonia.

In light of the above, we kindly request an extension of the deadline for submitting our response.

Once the review is complete, we will send the full response and supporting evidence to michal.v@casino.guru.

Thank you for your patience.

Dear Wazbee Casino,

We are waiting for your updates.

Dear Michal,

We have sent you an email with the mentioned evidence.

Dear Wazbee Casino,

I have received the email. I will need additional time to review the evidence internally. I will inform you as soon as there are any updates.

Dear Wazbee Casino,

I apologize for my late reply. Thank you for your continued attention to this case and for your cooperation throughout the complaint-resolution process.

We would like to emphasize that when a particular country is available for selection on a casino’s registration form, players are reasonably led to believe that registering and playing from that country is permitted. If residents or nationals of certain countries are not eligible to use the casino’s services, these restrictions should be clearly communicated and, wherever possible, enforced during registration.

The same principle applies to restrictions imposed by individual game providers. If specific games are prohibited in certain countries or jurisdictions, appropriate technical measures should be implemented to prevent affected players from accessing and playing those games. Without such safeguards, players may understandably assume that any game made available through their accounts is permitted. It would therefore be unreasonable to allow a player to access a game and place wagers, only to determine afterward—particularly once a withdrawal is requested—that their activity violated a restriction that was not technically enforced.

While players are expected to familiarize themselves with the casino’s terms and conditions, referring solely to those terms does not, in our view, sufficiently address the circumstances of this case. Such an approach is difficult to reconcile with the standards we expect from a casino holding the "Fair & Safe" badge and with the principles that this designation represents. Restrictions of this importance should not depend exclusively on players identifying potentially conflicting provisions within lengthy terms and conditions, especially when the casino’s registration process and software appear to permit the relevant activity.

In this particular case, it appears that both the player’s country of residence and nationality are being treated as problematic. However, the player provided both pieces of information transparently and did not attempt to conceal or misrepresent their circumstances. Despite having this information available, the casino permitted the player to register, access the relevant games, deposit funds, and play.

Considering the above, we kindly ask you to reassess the case and reconsider your current position. We believe that the consequences of restrictions that were neither clearly reflected in the registration process nor effectively enforced at the software level should not be placed entirely on the player.

Thank you in advance for reviewing the matter once again. We look forward to receiving your response and learning how you wish to proceed.

Dear Michal,

We appreciate the points raised. However, we believe that some aspects of the case require further clarification, as the current discussion appears to place the focus primarily on whether the relevant Pragmatic Play games were technically blocked at the software level.

As explained in our previous correspondence, there are two separate aspects to this case which should not be conflated.

First, the Operator is subject to contractual restrictions imposed through its third-party platform and game-provider arrangements. In particular, the platform provider applies additional jurisdictional restrictions to Pragmatic Play content, including a restriction applicable to Estonia. We have implemented and are required to comply with those restrictions.

Second, and importantly, the player's nationality and residence were established and assessed during the subsequent verification process. The player's Ukrainian nationality was not known to the Operator in its verified form at the initial registration stage. It was established when the documents submitted for verification were reviewed.

This distinction is important because the player's registration information cannot reasonably be regarded as a final determination of eligibility where that information is subsequently subject to verification. The purpose of KYC and compliance procedures is precisely to verify the information provided by the customer and to establish whether the customer and the relevant activity satisfy the applicable requirements.

Accordingly, the fact that the player was initially able to register, deposit and play does not mean that the Operator was required to disregard material information subsequently established during the verification process.

The same applies to the technical availability of Pragmatic Play content.

A contractual or jurisdictional restriction should not be equated with an unconditional technical authorisation to play merely because a particular game may technically be accessible. The Operator remains bound by the contractual restrictions applicable to the gaming content and is not entitled to knowingly permit activity which is contrary to those restrictions.

In this particular case, the player's use of a VPN was relevant because it enabled access notwithstanding the applicable jurisdictional restrictions. Our previous reference to the project being "VPN-friendly" was never intended to mean that a player may use a VPN to circumvent restrictions imposed by the Operator, its platform provider or individual game providers. These are two fundamentally different situations.

We would also like to clarify that the Pragmatic Play restriction was not the sole or independent basis for the account decision. The account was reviewed as a whole, including the player's verified nationality and residence, the applicable restrictions, the player's gameplay activity and the contractual requirements applicable to the content accessed. The Pragmatic Play restriction was therefore an additional factor within the overall compliance assessment rather than an isolated technical reason for refusing the withdrawal.

Once the relevant information was established during the verification process, the Operator could not simply disregard it and proceed with the withdrawal as if the information had not been identified.

This is also consistent with the Curaсao regulatory framework. The current Curaсao Gaming Authority licence conditions expressly require operators to maintain procedures concerning customer identification and verification and suspension and closure of player accounts, and require compliance with applicable regulatory requirements where activities are outsourced to third parties.

We therefore respectfully disagree with the proposition that the outcome of this case should be determined solely by whether the relevant game was technically accessible at the time the player played it.

The relevant question is whether, once the Operator had completed the applicable verification and compliance assessment and established the relevant circumstances, it was entitled to disregard those circumstances and approve the withdrawal. In our view, it was not.

Finally, without prejudice to our position regarding this individual case, we are reviewing the alignment between our registration process, verification triggers, platform restrictions and provider-level controls to further reduce the possibility of similar situations arising in the future. This prospective review does not constitute an admission that the decision made in this case was without contractual or compliance grounds.

Hello yuriim,

We would like to update you that due to Michal, your designated resolver, being on vacation, we have opted to extend the timeline by an additional 7 days. Since Michal has an in-depth understanding of your situation and maintains direct communication with the casino, we find this extension justified. Your patience is sincerely appreciated, and I assure you that Michal will contact you at the earliest opportunity.

Thank you for your understanding and ongoing patience.

Best regards, Casino Guru

Dear Wazbee Casino,

Thank you for your response. I would like to address a specific part of your last communication:

"In this particular case, the player's use of a VPN was relevant because it enabled access notwithstanding the applicable jurisdictional restrictions. Our previous reference to the project being "VPN-friendly" was never intended to mean that a player may use a VPN to circumvent restrictions imposed by the Operator, its platform provider, or individual game providers. These are two fundamentally different situations."

Could you please clarify if I understood correctly that you are suggesting the player used a VPN to bypass such restrictions? My initial concern was that there are no restrictions currently in place. I would appreciate your guidance on this matter so that I can grasp the situation fully.

We would like to ask the casino to reply to this complaint. We are extending the timer by 7 days. If the casino fails to respond in the set time frame, we will close the complaint as ‘unresolved’ which may negatively affect its rating.