RioBet Casino Review

The player from Brazil had requested a withdrawal of 2315 reais over 24 hours prior, but it remained pending despite the casino's usual prompt payment processing. The Complaints Team had acknowledged the issue and informed him that delays could have been due to KYC verification or high withdrawal volumes. After the casino confirmed that the funds had been paid, the player did not respond to further inquiries from the team. As a result, the complaint was rejected due to lack of engagement, although the player retained the option to reopen it.

The player from Brazil had requested a withdrawal of 10,500 reais, but after three days, the funds had not been received. A smaller withdrawal of 20 reais, which was processed on the 18th, had been completed, but the player expressed frustration over the delay and the casino's communication regarding the status of the larger withdrawal. The case remained unresolved as the player did not respond to inquiries from the Complaints Team, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Sweden had successfully completed verification and requested a withdrawal of 154 euros. However, after 48 hours without feedback, he expressed concern and dissatisfaction with the lack of support and considered closing his account. The Complaints Team acknowledged the issue and informed him that withdrawals could take time due to processing delays. Despite extending the response time, he did not reply, leading to the eventual rejection of the complaint.

The player from Austria had a problem with a 500EUR deposit via Skrill that had not been credited by the casino after five days. Despite confirming with Skrill that the transaction was successful, the casino had not provided a proper response or effective communication regarding the issue. The player's winnings were successfully credited to his account after he followed up on the matter. The complaint was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Brazil had made nearly 1,000 instant deposits via Pix and won 400.00 but faced delays in processing a withdrawal request made on the 13th, which had been promised to be completed within 24 hours. The withdrawal remained unprocessed. The issue was ultimately resolved when the winnings were paid out in cryptocurrencies, although the player received 382.00 due to processing fees. It was explained that the casino's payment methods could vary for deposits and withdrawals, which might have affected the player's experience. The complaint had been marked as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Chile finished 31st in the Rising Riches tournament and was owed a $100 prize that had not been credited within the promised timeframe. Despite multiple inquiries, the casino's response was vague, and she did not receive clarity on whether this issue affected all participants. After 30 days of waiting, the casino confirmed that the winnings had been credited. The issue was marked as resolved, and the player was thanked for their cooperation.

The player from Lithuania had been waiting for a withdrawal for less than two weeks. Unfortunately, their payout had not been received yet. After facing delays with his initial withdrawal to a Skrill account, he had switched to a crypto wallet as suggested by the casino. The issue had been resolved, and he confirmed that he received his funds. The complaint had been marked as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Brazil faced a withdrawal delay of over 24 hours, despite having a verified account. Although support indicated that the withdrawal would be processed, there was no specific timeframe given for completion. The player subsequently managed to withdraw successfully. The complaint was marked as resolved by us, acknowledging the player's cooperation and confirmation of the successful withdrawal.

The player from Russia faced issues withdrawing funds after attempting to meet a x3 wagering requirement while playing Mines. Despite having deposited with USDT TRC20, the casino claimed they could not process the withdrawal and required the player to fulfill the wagering requirement again. The issue was resolved when the player received the withdrawal, and the account balance was confirmed to be zero. The Complaints Team apologized for the negative experience and marked the query as resolved in their system.

The player from Brazil had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting their complaint. Their money had not been received yet. The issue was resolved when the player confirmed that the withdrawal had been successfully made through a cryptocurrency wallet. The Complaints Team marked the complaint as 'resolved' after the player updated them about the successful transaction.

The player from Brazil faced the cancellation of two withdrawal requests by the casino and had another request pending since 10/21, which had not been paid. The player only received chat responses indicating that the payment would be processed manually, but no payment had been made yet. The issue was resolved as the player confirmed receipt of the withdrawal.

The player from Brazil reported having a pending withdrawal at Rio Bet for over 24 hours and claimed that the casino was unresponsive and deceptive. The player expressed frustration over the lack of communication and the delay in processing his withdrawal, asserting that he had verified all required documentation and only used his own funds. The Complaints Team confirmed that the withdrawal process could take up to 14 days and marked the complaint as resolved after the player acknowledged the outcome.

The player from Brazil could not withdraw money from his verified account since 08/28/2024. Despite multiple inquiries to support, he did not receive a timeframe for resolution and was informed that his account was under investigation by the site provider. The Complaints Team attempted to gather more information but ultimately had to reject the complaint due to the player's lack of response to follow-up questions.

The player from Brazil had been waiting over a month for a decision regarding his account, which was under investigation, and had requested a prompt resolution to access his funds. The player reported that a previous withdrawal of $300 had failed, despite his documents being verified, and he was unable to place bets or withdraw. The complaints team facilitated communication with the casino, which ultimately lifted the account restrictions and confirmed that the winnings had been successfully paid out. The player confirmed receipt of the payment, leading to the resolution of the complaint.

The player from Brazil was frustrated after requesting a withdrawal of R$100, which had not been processed for hours despite their prompt deposit. The Complaints Team informed that the player had canceled the withdrawal and subsequently lost the winnings. As a result, the complaint was rejected, and the player was advised to reach out for assistance with any future issues.

The player from Russia reported that Riobet casino was not crediting accounts despite having proof of deposits totaling 200,000 rubles. Many others in a Telegram chat were experiencing the same issue, with the casino claiming incorrect transaction details from the payment gateway. The complaint was rejected due to the player's lack of response to inquiries, which prevented further investigation.

The player from Russia made a deposit at Riobet Casino on September 10, but the funds never appeared in her account despite being reflected in the dashboard. After 6 days of waiting and receiving only automated responses from customer support about a gateway issue, she became frustrated and demanded her money back. The Complaints Team attempted to assist by advising her to contact her payment provider and requested additional documentation to investigate the issue. However, the player did not respond to the team's follow-up inquiries, which led to the rejection of the complaint due to insufficient information for further investigation.

The player from Greece could not play any games at the casino despite registering and wished to have her money refunded. The complaint was rejected due to a lack of response from her regarding the team's requests for additional information needed to investigate the issue. Consequently, no further solutions could be provided at that time. The player was informed that she could reopen the complaint in the future if she decided to resume communication.

The player from Brazil reported that the casino did not fulfill bonuses as advertised and sought a refund of $20.00. The complaint was ultimately rejected as the player had gambled away the balance associated with the bonus, and the casino had not provided a response regarding the issue. We clarified that if a promised bonus was not credited, players were advised to contact the casino immediately and avoid using their balance until the matter was resolved.

The player from Brazil faced a second investigation of his account by the casino, which had previously taken three months to resolve before allowing a withdrawal. He emphasized that he had bet fairly without using bonuses and sought a resolution to retrieve his funds. The Complaints Team extended the response time for the player to provide necessary information, but the player did not respond. As a result, the complaint was rejected due to lack of communication.

The player from Brazil had withdrawals blocked for over a month. Despite completing the requested verification, the casino did not release the withdrawal. We requested additional information from the player to proceed but did not receive a response. Consequently, the complaint was rejected due to lack of communication from the player.

A player from Brazil had completed the KYC process and made a deposit at the casino without receiving any bonuses. Since April 20, 2024, the casino had delayed his withdrawal, citing ongoing analysis by the game provider. The player believed the casino was refusing to pay out the withdrawal despite no rule violations. We rejected the complaint due to the player's lack of response to our messages and questions, making it impossible to proceed with further investigation or provide solutions.

The player from Brazil had deposited 100 USDT on Riobet and won 2,000 USDT in Aviator. For over two months, the casino had not processed the withdrawal nor returned the deposit, repeatedly stating that the provider was analyzing the winnings. We contacted the casino, which confirmed that the delay was due to an ongoing investigation by the game provider. The casino eventually processed the player's withdrawal, and the player confirmed receiving the winnings. The complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Germany had registered and verified his account 15 days ago. After depositing $200 and then $300, he won and made a withdrawal of $500, leaving $1200 in his account. The casino denied his withdrawal and confiscated $1200, accusing him of using a forbidden strategy. The Complaints Team was currently awaiting further evidence from the casino regarding the accusations, and the case was classified as 'waiting for regulator decision' until more information was provided.

The player from Ukraine reported that the casino used rigged scripts, had a very low rating, and blocked accounts without reason. The player claimed that her account was active, but the slots consumed her balance unfairly. We requested additional information and game history to investigate further. Due to the player's lack of response, the complaint was rejected as we could not proceed without the necessary details.

The player from Russia had faced an issue with withdrawing his winnings of 14,000 rubles from an online casino. The casino had claimed to have processed the payment, but the player had not received the funds. After some time, the player confirmed that the issue had been resolved and the complaint was marked as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from Brazil had deposited 1000 reais at an online casino, increased his balance to 2500 reais, but faced accusations of using bots when he attempted to withdraw his winnings. The casino had returned his initial deposit, confiscated the winnings of 1500 reais, and closed his account. However, the player later realized he had mistaken the casino platform, confusing riobet.com.br with riobet.io. He subsequently asked for his complaint to be closed. We obliged and informed him that we were available to assist with any future issues.

The player from Brazil complained about a delay in resolving his withdrawal issue with RioBet. It had been over 15 days, but the casino said it had not received a response from the provider. The player confirmed that he had made several deposits and withdrawals before, and his account was not restricted. The casino eventually informed him that he was now free to make withdrawals. The player later confirmed he had received his winnings, and the complaint was marked as resolved.

The player from Brazil was dissatisfied with the casino's promotion methods, stating that a deposit was required to receive any bonus. We explained to the player that each casino had the freedom to design their bonus conditions and decide which player was eligible for any type of bonus. We also provided a link to a list of No Deposit bonuses for the player to consider. Despite extending the timer for response by 7 days, the player failed to respond to our messages and questions. Consequently, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Ukraine had reported an issue with depositing money into the casino since 25.08.23, and was not able to see the funds in his account. We had suggested he contact his payment provider for an investigation, as the casino was unable to assist. The player had provided a receipt showing the money had been debited, but no resolution was reached as he failed to respond to further inquiries. Therefore, we were unable to proceed with the investigation and had to reject the complaint.

The player from Moldova had faced verification issues at Riobet Casino due to his documents being from an unrecognized republic. This was not stated in the casino's rules and he had never faced issues at other platforms using the same passport. He requested compensation for the inconvenience. After reviewing the case, we acknowledged that while the casino's terms and conditions did not explicitly prohibit players from Transnistria or reject their documents, casinos typically required official documents issued by internationally recognized authorities. We recommended the player provide other official documents, but he claimed to only have a passport from the Transnistrian Republic. The player failed to respond to further messages, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Ukraine had experienced issues with two failed deposits of 300 hryvnia each at an online casino, and the problem persisted for two days. The casino had cited issues with the payment gateway as the cause. The player later confirmed that the 300 hryvnia had been returned, but it remained unclear if the full amount of 600 hryvnia had been recovered. We closed the complaint because the player stopped responding. After reopening the complaint the player confimred he was missing 300 hryvnia. Unfortunately we haven't received responses from the player to our questions, therefore we closed the complaint once more.

The player from Malta has deposited money into his casino account but the funds seem to be lost. The casino provided us with an explanation. We rejected the complaint because the player stopped responding.

The player from Russia is struggling to withdraw his winnings. The casino claims that the game provider decided to perform a gameplay check. The casino eventually decided to give the player their winnings back. The issue was resolved.

The player from Russia was experiencing difficulties withdrawing funds because the transactions via chosen payment method weren’t available. Later, we learned from the casino representative that the issue has been resolved. The player received their funds via their preferred payment method. We rejected the complaint because of the player's use of abusive language and due to a lack of their cooperation.

The player thinks that the casino affects the game settings. The casino explained to him that it is a responsibility of the game provider. We rejected this complaint because the player failed to react to our message.

The player from Russia complained that he was unable to block his account in the online casino. We had informed him that the casino allowed self-exclusion for a maximum of 1 year and this was only available for verified players. The player insisted that the casino was not assisting him. The casino representative advised the player to request a permanent block through a support ticket. Despite our several attempts to guide the player on how to block his account, the player did not confirm whether he had taken the necessary steps. The complaint was eventually rejected as the player failed to respond to further inquiries.

Vladimir, a player from Russia, is complaining that Riobet casino blocked his account and delayed his withdrawal. We rejected the complaint because the player didn't respond to our messages and questions.