DelOro Casino Review

The player from the United Kingdom reported that DelOro casino had confiscated £12,210, alleging fraud related to a sister casino, HeatsCasino. He had also requested a complete list of his deposits and withdrawals, which the casino refused to provide. The player believed the fraud accusation was unfounded and sought assistance after receiving a favorable ruling in a similar case. The player requested to withdraw the complaint, and the Complaints Team closed the case accordingly.

The player from Portugal faced difficulties in closing her account at the casino, as she felt the casino was obstructing the process. After informing the casino of her intention to report the matter, her account was deleted, resolving the issue. The Complaints Team marked the complaint as 'resolved'.

The player from Sweden raised concerns about DelOro casino failing to follow their own AML/KYC policies regarding source of funds verification. She had lost 45,478 SEK after depositing a total of 103,059 SEK without ever being asked about the legitimacy of her funds, despite her current unemployment status. She sent multiple emails and contacted customer support without receiving a response and blocked her account to prevent further gambling. The Complaints Team concluded that DelOro acted promptly in self-excluding her account, but due to the AOFA licensing standards, they were not required to enforce self-exclusion across all brands under the same ownership. Therefore, her complaint was rejected as no violation of terms or licensing requirements was found.

The player from Canada expressed concern about his gambling problem and requested a permanent self-exclusion from the casino network after recent issues. Despite stating his gambling issues, the casino continued to encourage deposits, and after winning $4000, his request for self-exclusion was ignored, leading to frustration over his inability to withdraw. The Complaints Team reviewed the situation and concluded that the player had the option to self-exclude through the casino's tool but chose not to, resulting in the rejection of his complaint. The player was encouraged to utilize the self-exclusion tool for future issues.

The player from Canada faced delays in account verification required for withdrawals, as the process had been pending for almost a week despite the casino's claim of 48 hours. Each inquiry to support yielded the same response about being busy, leaving the player's funds inaccessible. The complaint was ultimately rejected due to the player's lack of response to the Complaints Team's requests for additional information necessary for the investigation.

The player from Sweden had been frustrated after being recommended to HeatsCasino despite having a gambling problem, which led to a $2,000 deposit and subsequent loss of all funds. After reporting the issue to Del Oro Casino, he received no support, yet his account at HeatsCasino was closed shortly after, indicating a connection between the two casinos. The Complaints Team reviewed the case and concluded that while the player's concerns about the casino's practices were understood, the recommendation made by an individual agent did not reflect a failure of the casino as a whole. Therefore, the complaint was deemed unjustified, and the player was informed that Del Oro Casino could not be held responsible for the losses incurred at HeatsCasino.

The player from Spain initially requested a permanent account closure due to gambling addiction but later asked to reopen the account and lost 200 euros. Despite acknowledging the earlier closure request, the casino refused to refund the deposit, citing a document the player signed that released them from responsibility. The Complaints Team maintained that the player was eligible for a refund due to the improper reopening of the account, emphasizing the casino's failure to uphold self-exclusion standards. The issue was resolved when the player reached an agreement with the casino, and the funds were successfully returned to his bank account.

The player from Japan faced a delay in the KYC verification process, which had been pending for over a month, preventing him from withdrawing his winnings. Despite having contacted support, he received confusing advice suggesting that additional play could expedite verification. The issue was resolved after the Complaints Team intervened, confirming the approval of his submitted documents, which allowed him to successfully withdraw his funds. The casino later informed him that he had received all of his withdrawals, although they did not provide a detailed explanation for the closure of his account.

The player from Austria faced a two-week delay in account verification and received unfulfilled promises from the live chat support regarding the withdrawal process. The player reported that his ID document was verified, but his selfie was rejected, leading to ongoing frustrations with live chat support. The issue was resolved after the casino completed the verification process, allowing the player to access his winnings. We marked the complaint as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from the Netherlands filed a complaint against DelOro for reopening his account despite a prior request for permanent self-exclusion. He felt that the casino had a responsibility to honor this request and expressed frustration over the lack of communication and assistance from their support team regarding his situation. The player confirmed he had proof he informed the casino about his gambling problem in December 2023 and reached a resolution with the casino shortly afterward. After confirming the resolution of the issue we closed the complaint as resolved.

The player from Bavaria reported inaccurate withdrawal information from Casino Deloro, where he could only withdraw 1,000 euros daily instead of the claimed 10,000 euros. Despite winning 5,000 euros, he faced distress due to this limit and requested a refund of his total deposits minus any withdrawals. The Complaints Team concluded that since the player had lost the remaining funds and there were no funds left in his casino account, there was nothing that could be done, and the complaint was rejected.

The player from Germany initially requested account closure due to gambling addiction, which was granted but then reversed shortly after. Despite acknowledging the addiction, the player lost approximately 6000 Euros without any ability to cash out and is now seeking help to recover the funds.

The player from Hungary had requested a refund for his deposits after his account was reopened against his wishes. He had initially asked for his account to be closed permanently but found it reopened briefly, which led to losses. The Complaints Team had explained that a refund could only be processed if he had specified a gambling addiction in his initial request for account closure. Since he did not provide this information, the complaint was closed without a resolution for the refund request.

The player from French Guiana faced delays in the document verification process and received no response regarding their account verification, which led to a loss of trust in the casino. They felt discouraged about recovering their funds. The issue was resolved when the player's account was verified and the winnings were credited to their account.

The player from Greece accused the casino of manipulating the RTP and failing to respond in the chat. The player stated that the casino was unlicensed in Greece and refused to return any funds. The Complaints Team informed the player that without concrete evidence of unfair practices, they were unable to take further action on the complaint. The complaint was rejected due to the lack of substantial evidence, and the player was encouraged to provide any supporting documentation for a potential reopening of the case.

The player from Austria expressed concern about the casino's handling of addiction issues, stating that his account was frequently reopened despite his request for closure. He indicated that he had deposited over 10,000 euros and requested a return of deposits made after the account closure due to gambling addiction. The issue was resolved after the player communicated with the casino, leading to a satisfactory resolution. The Complaints Team marked the complaint as 'resolved' in their system, appreciating the player's cooperation.

The player from Mexico had their account disabled with funds still available and was unable to retrieve their money. After mistakenly depositing 700EUR, they faced account closure due to alleged suspicions and claims of multiple accounts, which the player denied. Despite attempts to contact support, there had been no response, and the player requested the return of their deposited funds. The Complaints Team had communicated with the casino and determined that the player needed to complete a video verification process to address the account issues. The complaint was set to be rejected until verification was completed, allowing for potential reopening once the requirements were met.

The player from Spain claimed that he was owed 1,403 € from an agreement with casino representatives Victoria and Allison, which stipulated a 15% refund on daily losses. After a significant loss, the casino denied the refund, citing that the player had been winning for the month, despite no agreement stating this condition. The player felt deceived and believed the casino was withholding funds. The issue was resolved and marked as 'resolved' by the Complaints Team, confirming the outcome with the player.

The player from the Netherlands reported issues with setting deposit limits at the casino, stating that despite requesting a weekly limit of 400€, he was allowed to deposit 400€ daily. He expressed frustration over feeling manipulated and sought compensation for his total losses exceeding 5,000€. The issue was resolved by rejecting the complaint following the player's explicit request to close it.

The player from Germany formally complained about the online casino that reopened his account against his request after he had asked for a permanent closure. Despite having received confirmation of the closure, he was able to reactivate the account and subsequently lost €5,000. He demanded reimbursement for his losses. The Complaints Team reviewed the situation and concluded that the player's requests for closure did not indicate gambling issues, and a self-exclusion request was deemed fabricated. Therefore, the complaint was rejected as unjustified, with an emphasis on the importance of honesty in responsible gambling practices.

The player from Austria reported that the Baccarat section of the casino had been unexpectedly deactivated, preventing her from placing higher bets, which were rejected despite her winning. She demanded a refund of her missing winnings totaling 450 Euros and claimed that the casino had been unresponsive and unhelpful regarding the situation. The issue remained unresolved as the player did not respond to the Complaints Team's requests for additional information, leading to the rejection of the complaint.

The player from Chile had been facing issues with the casino after a bonus balance of 1714 EUR was removed during an ongoing investigation. Despite having provided multiple requested documents, the casino had stopped responding to his emails. The complaint team has tried to intervene and it was agreed the player needed to undergo a video verification as a part of the KYC process. After a video verification call, the casino determined that the player did not pass the verification process due to significant discrepancies in the information provided. Consequently, the complaint was closed as rejected, and the player was advised to contact the casino’s licensing authority if they still felt unfairly treated.

The player from the Netherlands had been waiting for a response from Deloro casino for two weeks regarding an unresolved issue, despite receiving kind support from chat. She had sent multiple emails without a solution being provided, only being informed that the office was busy. The Complaints Team had extended the response time and requested further information, but the player did not respond. As a result, the complaint was rejected due to insufficient information to investigate further.

The player from Poland had requested a permanent closure of their account at Deloro Casino six months ago due to gambling addiction, but the casino had repeatedly reopened it. Over that period, the player estimated losses of approximately 4000 PLN and had asked the casino for a refund, but had not received a response. The issue was resolved after the player communicated with the casino and reached an agreement regarding the account closure. The complaint was marked as 'resolved' in our system.

The player from the UK had asked to close her casino account due to spending concerns but was persuaded by live chat to set a £25 deposit limit instead. The limit was not applied immediately, leading her to spend £75. She felt that the account should have been closed and that responsible gambling measures were not followed. We facilitated communication between the player and the casino, ultimately resulting in a resolution where she accepted a £30 refund as compensation, despite her initial request for a higher amount. The complaint was marked as resolved, and she confirmed receipt of her funds.

The player from Germany complained that the casino had failed to perform KYC checks, ignored his requested deposit limit, and did not verify his eligibility to participate in online casino games. Due to these violations, he demanded reimbursement of all deposits. The complaint was closed at the player's request.

The player from the Netherlands, who had a known gambling addiction, registered at DelOro Casino without any KYC verification and deposited €1,900. Despite being banned from multiple casinos, he was able to deposit funds. He sought a refund of €1,900, believing that registration and deposits should have been prevented due to his gambling addiction. We concluded that the player did not inform the casino of his gambling problem before making deposits and therefore, there was no basis for a refund. The complaint was closed as rejected due to the lack of evidence supporting the refund request.

The player from the Netherlands, who had previously self-excluded due to an addiction, was allowed to register and play at DelOro Casino, resulting in a loss of 18k in one month. He believed the casino should refund his money, as he should not have been permitted to register. The casino subsequently blocked his account. We were unable to assist further due to the player's lack of response to our inquiries. We closed the complaint as a result.

The player from Sweden, who was dealing with a gambling addiction and undergoing treatment, had requested Del Oro to close her account permanently. Despite this, the casino had contacted her unsolicited after her cool-off period, which led her to reopen the account and lose around 1700 EUR. Although she had asked for a full refund of her deposits minus withdrawals, the casino admitted their mistake but offered only about 20% back, citing operational costs. The issue was resolved with the casino and the player coming to an agreement.

The player from Germany requested permanent account closure at Del Oro Casino due to gambling addiction. Despite informing the casino, they continued to allow account reopening. The issue was resolved when the player reached an agreement with the casino to receive a refund for his deposits. The Complaints Team facilitated communication between the player and the casino, ultimately leading to a satisfactory resolution. The player confirmed the closure of the complaint after the agreement was reached.

The player from Belgium had deposited around 80,000€ to Deloro Casino over the weekend, but the casino claimed they hadn't received it. Although small deposits were accepted promptly, the larger amount remained unaccounted for. Despite daily communication with the casino, the issue was unresolved and the player claimed the casino had acted illegally. We had advised the player to contact his bank for an investigation, and asked for evidence of the transactions. However, the player did not respond within the given timeframe, leaving us unable to further investigate. Consequently, the complaint was rejected.

The player from France had won 4800 euros at Delorocasino, but claimed the winnings had disappeared from their casino account. The player's attempts to contact the casino had been unsuccessful and a casino representative named Sofia had cited a software provider error as the reason for the missing funds. We had reached out to the player for additional information to better understand the situation, but the player had not responded to our messages and questions. As a result, we were unable to investigate further and had to reject this complaint.

The player from Ukraine, who initially had a verified account, faced withdrawal problems after his account reverted to unverified status. Despite numerous attempts, he hadn't received any response via support chat or email from the casino. The player had successfully withdrawn funds in the past and had $315 in his account, $200 of which were his personal deposits. The casino had contacted him and pointed out some of his sports bets were prohibited on their platform. The player attempted to negotiate a refund of his deposits but was unsuccessful. We had concluded that since the casino's main concern was related to sports betting, an area outside of our purview, we could not proceed with the complaint. Despite the player's activities in the casino, the primary issue had been related to sports betting, leading to the closure of the complaint.

The player from Germany, who had self-identified as having a gambling addiction, had expressed concern that the casino had kept reopening his account, leading to a financial loss of 925.80€. He had reached out for a refund but had received no reply. The casino had disputed the claimed loss amount and had provided evidence of the player's transaction history. After a series of discussions, the casino had agreed to refund the player and closed his account. The player had confirmed receipt of the refund and no longer required further assistance. We had advised the player to seek a long-term solution to his gambling addiction and suggested the use of our Self-Exclusion Assistance Tool. The issue has been resolved successfully.

The player from Kuwait, who had self-excluded due to problem gambling, had his account reopened by the casino shortly after closure, which led to a loss of a significant amount. He requested a refund of his deposits. The Complaints Team, after reviewing the case and considering all the available information and details, concluded that the casino should not have reopened the player's account. The casino, after negotiating with the Complaints Team, agreed to refund the player's deposits. The player later confirmed the receipt of the refund, which resolved the complaint.

The player from the Netherlands had an issue with an online casino, accusing them of having ignored her request to freeze her account while waiting for KYC verification. Despite her efforts to avoid gambling, she had lost all her winnings. She blamed the casino for having neglected responsible gaming norms and demanded a refund of all her deposits. The player claimed to have requested account closure due to her gambling problem but was ignored. After losing her funds, she had managed to deposit an additional €900 which she also lost. The player had expressed dissatisfaction with the casino's handling of responsible gaming and accused them of having operated illegally in the Netherlands. However, we had clarified that the casino had 48 hours to process a self-exclusion request and had acted correctly according to their terms. The player then requested to close her casino.guru account, which we complied with, and the complaint was closed.

The player from Canada had requested self-exclusion from a casino, but despite these requests, continued to receive marketing emails. Furthermore, despite experiencing technical difficulties while playing, he had been advised to use a VPN, which went against the casino's guidelines. Attempts to permanently close the account were met with cashback offers, with the assurance that he could easily reopen the account. We provided guidance on how to properly request self-exclusion and asked for more details, but the player did not respond. Consequently, we had to reject the complaint due to lack of communication from the player's side.

The player from Austria was unable to withdraw his winnings of 900 euros due to a verification process that had not been completed within the promised 48 hours. He encountered confusion in communication with support, receiving no responses when he attempted to follow up on his account status. The issue was resolved after he was verified, allowing him to withdraw up to 1,000 euros, although a fee applied, and he was informed that higher withdrawal amounts required VIP status. The Complaints Team marked the complaint as resolved, appreciating his cooperation.

The player from the United Kingdom faced issues with verification after submitting all required documents, which prevented him from withdrawing his £3085.94. He expressed concerns about the casino's legitimacy and experienced poor customer support. After ongoing communication regarding the verification process, his account was finally verified, allowing him to access his funds. The issue was marked as resolved by the Complaints Team.

The player from Bulgaria faced difficulties with withdrawing funds after making a significant profit. Although he submitted verification documents on January 2-3, the verification remained incomplete despite multiple follow-ups and assurances from support. He later reported that his ID had been verified, and he successfully withdrew his winnings. The issue was marked as resolved after confirmation of the successful withdrawal.

The player from Greece had a dispute with Heats Casino regarding the removal of his balance after meeting wagering requirements. After playing and increasing his balance to 15,079 euros, he encountered a reduction of winnings to 120 euros. The Complaints Team intervened, highlighting that the casino's policy of capping winnings after fulfilling bonus requirements was unfair and inconsistent. Following discussions, the player reached an agreement with the casino, leading to the resolution of the complaint.