Kingmaker Casino

The player from Portugal has requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. The player from Italy had a problem with the casino, as they did not credit his withdrawal of 350 euros. We requested additional information from the player to proceed with the investigation. However, the player did not respond to our messages and questions. As a result, the complaint was rejected due to a lack of response. The player from Germany requested account closure on February 17th but received no response for nearly two weeks.

They sought a refund of deposits made since June 26, 2024, and the immediate blocking of their account. The complaint was rejected because the casino closed the account within three business days, which was considered an acceptable timeframe for account closure. The player from Finland had requested a withdrawal less than two weeks prior to submitting this complaint. After a prolonged wait of nearly three weeks, the player confirmed that he had received his funds. The Complaints Team marked the issue as resolved, expressing readiness to assist with any future concerns. The player from Greece had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks prior to contacting us.

Unjustified complaint

The player had confirmed his email address and had urged the casino to process the payment. The casino later confirmed that the payment had been processed and apologized for the delay. The player then acknowledged receipt of the payment and withdrew his complaint. We had concluded that the issue was resolved based on the correspondence but had to reject the complaint without official confirmation from the player. The player from Greece had experienced issues with withdrawing his winnings from the casino. His withdrawal request had been pending for an extended period.

All withdrawal attempts, either via credit card or bank transfer, were declined. The player had received little support from the casino’s staff, with delayed responses and repetitive avoidance. After the player’s complaint, the casino confirmed that three withdrawals of 500 EUR each had been processed and should arrive shortly.

The kingmaker casino player from Italy sought to recover deposits totaling 3,000 euros from a Curacao-based casino that operated without an AAMS license. Despite having an active self-exclusion in Italy, the casino did not acknowledge it. After reviewing the case, it was concluded that the refund request could not be justified, as the player did not inform the casino of his gambling problem or self-exclusion before requesting a refund.

Free Cash and Free Spins Welcome Bonus and Bags More

The casino acted promptly by closing the account following the refund request, which limited the ability to assist further. The player from Portugal had an issue with the casino reactivating her account without her consent, despite her request for self-exclusion in December. The Complaints Team attempted to gather more information from her regarding the self-exclusion request and the casino’s confirmation of account cancellation.

As a result, the investigation could not proceed, leading to the rejection of the complaint. The player from Germany has requested a withdrawal prior to submitting this complaint. Our team contacted the customer support during the review process to gain an accurate picture of the quality of the service. Customer support is crucial to us because it can be very useful in resolving problems with player’s account, registration at Kingmaker Casino, withdrawals, and other potential areas of concern. According to our tests and collected information, Kingmaker Casino has an average customer support. When reviewing online casinos, we collect information about their customer support and language options.

Receive news and fresh no deposit bonuses from us

The player from Greece had requested a withdrawal of €400 more than two weeks ago, but it had not been processed despite the casino’s 3-day policy. The customer service responses did not provide any explanation for the delay. After the player submitted a complaint, the casino confirmed that the payment was scheduled. We had marked the complaint as ‘resolved’ in our system, after the player’s confirmation of receiving his winnings. The player from Germany had been unable to withdraw his winnings since 8th of March, 2024.

Based on the categorization we use, this makes it a medium-sized online casino. To our knowledge, Kingmaker Casino is absent from any significant casino blacklists. Casino blacklists, such as our own Casino Guru blacklist, may indicate mistreatment of customers by a casino. Therefore, we recommend players consider these lists when selecting a casino to play at. In our review of Kingmaker Casino, we read and assessed Terms and Conditions of Kingmaker Casino in-depth.

The player from Spain has 3 pending withdrawals from Kingmaker Casino dated back to April 2024. Despite repeated complaints and assurances from support, the withdrawals are still not processed. The player from Germany had deposited 3070€ in the Kingmaker Casino while she was registered in the OASIS exclusion database. She complained that the Casino had not prevented her from gambling despite her exclusion status and requested a refund of her deposits.

The player from North Rhine-Westphalia had submitted a withdrawal request less than two weeks before contacting us. The player had expressed dissatisfaction with the casino’s customer service and suspected fraudulent activities. We had advised the player to be patient and allow up to 14 days for withdrawals to be processed.

After multiple communications with the casino and the complaints team, the player finally received their funds. However, they raised another issue of a pending withdrawal of €70 from a bonus win. The complaints team had advised the player to wait up to 14 days for the withdrawal to be processed and paid out. The player from Greece had been waiting for nearly ten days for his withdrawal. Despite repeated contact with customer service, he had been informed about delays due to a large volume of requests and hadn’t been asked for identification yet. However, the player did not respond to our messages and questions, hence we were unable to investigate further and had to reject the complaint.