Hráči ze Spojených států amerických nejsou akceptováni
This review was last updated: 2018-06-27T00:00Z
Tým Casino Guru zhodnotil kasino Thrills Casino po důkladné analýze stížností hráčů a obchodních podmínek kasina. Bohužel reputaci kasina musíme hodnotit jako podprůměrnou, protože jsme našli poměrně vysoké množství oprávněných stížností týkajících se problémů při výběru výher nebo porušení obchodních podmínek, které nejsou vždy vyřešeny k spokojnosti hráčů. Pokud se kasino nezlepší a nebudeme moci upravit naše hodnocení a doporučujeme hrát v kasinech s lepším hodnocením reputace. Přečtěte si celou recenzi s podrobnými informacemi o těchto stížnostech, procesu výběru nebo Thrills Casino bonusů.
Rezidenti ze Spojených států amerických
IP adresa ze Spojených států amerických
Všechny jazyky webu
anglicky finsky norsky švédsky
Live Chat Language
All livechat languages
anglicky finsky norsky švédsky
Email Support Language
All customer support languages
anglicky finsky norsky švédsky
Bonus bez vkladu
Zobrazit všechny (11)
Zobrazit všechny (16)
Betit Operations Ltd
Velké kasino populární v Evropě a Skandinávii
Kasino řeší spory veřejně
Výběry peněz jsou bez limitu
Kasino umožnilo založení účtu samovyloučeným hráčům ze sesterských kasin a poté jim zabavilo výhry
Complaints about Thrills Casino and related casinos (16)
We have conducted extensive research on the we and as a result we have found following 16 complaints on Thrills Casino or any brands that might be interconnected with it. Taking into account seriousness and credibility of these complaints and estimated size of casino revenues we decided to give Thrills Casino a Sporná reputation.
Direct complaints about Thrills Casino casino
Stupid excuse or fraud
Černé body: 4800
Player accused of being from a restricted country, all funds seized.
Player complained that after he opened an account, made a deposit, won and asked for a withdrawal his winning was seized as it turned out he was playing from a restricted country and his winning was canceled, only deposit returned. Player didn't understand how come he was able to play despite being from a restricted country. Casino replied that it is stated in the terms and conditions and the situation of him being able to play was temporary, then they said it was due to a technical issue. Player was advised to seek further help with licensing authority.
Player complained he played in the casino with his real money as his wife had already had an account there so he was not eligible for a welcome bonus. After he made some winnings his account was blocked. Casino replied this was because only one account is permitted per a household and later they also pointed out to the fact that the player had self-excluded himself from the group of casinos that belong to the same brand. Player's deposit was returned.
Fraud accusation, account blocked, all funds seized.
Player complained that after he achieved some winning from a free bonus and made a deposit prior to withdrawal of his winnings his account was suddenly blocked and the deposit returned to him. When he asked the casino for a reason they replied that the user was a fraud. Player refused strictly such accusation and provided proofs of him being right He was advised to turn to the licensing authority.
Complaints on related SuperLenny Casino (Same management)
Černé body: -13
Player complained that he wanted to deposit £20 but deposited £100 by mistake. He contacted live support and asked for a refund. However his account got closed. When he asked for a reason the live support replied to him that he had self-excluded himself from a sister casino site - which should be valid for all the brands from that group. He asked why his account hadn't been closed in the past 8 months or why they had accepted his deposit. He got no reply from the casino. The casino then replied in the complaint that his deposit will be returned, no more update.
Complaints on related Betspin Casino (Same management)
Uncertain case, good regulator
Černé body: 105
All winnings canceled, player accused of T&C breach, uncertain case.
Player complained she asked for a withdrawal but all her winnings were canceled because she was accused of terms and conditions breach. The casino didn't reply and kept saying there were technical issues. No reply or proofs from the casino, uncertain case.
Complaints on related Highroller Casino (Same management)
Delayed payment, likely paid
Černé body: 100
Player pointed out to the fact that he didn't have any issues with withdrawal before, that is why this delay in payment transfer surprised him. He was in touch with the casino support who told him there was a global outage in payments and that he might've been affected. No more update since, the player has probably been paid.
Complaints on related Kaboo Casino (Same management)
Uncertain case, good regulator
Černé body: 250
The terms and conditions were breached due to a self-exclusion at the casino´s sister casino and all the funds were returned to the player´s account.
Nicholas made a withdrawal previously without any problems. But when he requested a much bigger withdrawal of £9,246 he was denied due to a self-exclusion in their sister casino. He had no idea they are sister casinos and was also surprised that he was able to withdraw much smaller amount previously without any hesitation from the casino. The complaint remains unresolved and has waited for an answer from the MGA (Malta Gaming Authority).
The terms and conditions of self-exclusion were breached and all the deposits were returned to the player.
The player made three deposits and won £1,200. When the player tried to login into the account, the access was denied and he/she was asked to contact the support team. The casino informed the player that the account was closed due to the self-exclusion at one of their sister casinos. The casino decided to return the player´s deposit. There is no further information on the case.
The terms and conditions were breached due to a self-exclusion at the casino´s sister casino and the deposit was returned.
The player, MILNEJ2, requested a withdrawal of £360 and sent all the documents for verification. Shortly after that, his account was closed and the funds were returned to him. The casino claimed he self-excluded himself in one of their sister casinos. The player claimed that he didn´t know about the other casino being their sister casino and was surprised that he was able to sign in with the same details, deposit money, and play. The casino apologized to the player for the inconvenience but there was nothing else they could do about it. There was no information online about these two casinos being sister casinos. No further information on this case is available.
The terms and conditions about self-exclusion were breached and all funds were returned to the player.
Joeshmo requested a withdrawal of £250 but was denied due to the self-exclusion at one of the casino´s sister site. His winnings were confiscated and his deposits were returned to him. The player mentioned that there is no information online about these casinos being sister sites. There is no further information on this case and it remains unresolved.
The access to the account was denied and all the funds were seized without a relevant explanation to the player.
The player was denied an access into the account. When the player read other complaints about self-excluded players at the casino´s sister site, he/she realized that this would probably be the same case. The player didn´t have any idea that these casinos were sister casinos. A player requested a refund of his deposits and AskGamblers had recommended contacting the MGA (Malta Gaming Authority). There is no further information on the case.
Show 5 similiar complaints with 589 black points in total
Complaints on related Guts Casino (Same management)
Černé body: 3666
Player complained that he was allowed to open an account in this casino despite the fact that he had self-excluded himself permanently in all casinos with the same group owner. Player had made some deposits and lost and he demanded a refund. Casino replied that at the time when the player self-excluded himself the casino was owned by a different group and thus the delay in accounts verification after the acquisition. The player complained about the slow responsiveness of the casino. No more update.
Player complained that after he won a large amount he was asked by the casino to send all kind of identity-proving documents. Additionally, he was asked to send another proof of address and was told to upload it via the website but as his account was suspended he was unable to do so so he sent it via email but the casino kept telling him to upload it via the website. After, he was asked to send again a bank statement. He didn't understand what was wrong with the statement he had already provided recently but the casino wouldn't clarify this for him. The player felt he was being mistreated. Casino support manager replied to him several times that his matter would be carefully investigated. No more update since.
Player complained that while he was playing a game and winning there was a malfunction that caused an unfair result. Player reported this to the casino which was taking a very long time to reply. They replied they were waiting for the game provider to investigate on this. No more update since.