Complainant:
David Uwimana
Account ID: parzivo
Casino Operator:
SlotsPlus Casino
Website: https://www.slotsplus.eu
1. Introduction
I am submitting this report to formally raise a complaint regarding the voiding of my legitimate winnings and the refusal to process my $100 withdrawal request by SlotsPlus Casino. I believe the decision was made based on unclear or improperly communicated rules and that the casino allowed gameplay that it later used as grounds to void my winnings.
2. Account and Withdrawal Details
I hold an account with SlotsPlus under the username “parzivo.” After completing gameplay on the platform, I submitted a withdrawal request for $100 via Bitcoin.
My account was successfully verified, and the withdrawal request was submitted through the casino’s withdrawal system. However, instead of processing the withdrawal, the casino contacted me stating that my winnings had been voided due to an alleged violation of a bonus rule.
3. Casino’s Reason for Voiding the Withdrawal
The casino sent me the following explanation:
They claim that while wagering with bonus funds, I exceeded a maximum bet limit of $20, which they state is a violation of their rules. They further claimed that I placed wagers 12 times on the games Ripcord Rush and Galaxy Blast, with an average bet of $78.08 during the bonus playthrough.
Based on this alleged violation, they stated that both my bonus and my winnings were voided and that the withdrawal could not be processed.
4. Review of the Casino’s Terms & Conditions
After receiving this explanation, I carefully reviewed the official SlotsPlus Terms & Conditions available on their website.
In the Terms & Conditions document, the casino references Section 7 – Bonuses & Promotions, which states that the casino reserves the right to revoke bonuses in cases such as:
bonus abuse
exploiting system vulnerabilities
unfair betting strategies
behavior inconsistent with fair play
However, the Terms & Conditions do not specify any maximum bet amount, nor do they clearly state a $20 wagering limit during bonus play.
Because of this, the rule the casino referenced in their email appears not to be clearly defined within the general Terms & Conditions available to players.
5. Availability of the Games Played
During my gameplay, I played the games Ripcord Rush and Galaxy Blast, which were available and fully accessible on the platform.
On the SlotsPlus website, games that are not eligible for bonus wagering are typically marked as locked or restricted in the casino lobby. The games I played were not locked or restricted, and they were fully available for wagering during my play session.
Because these games were accessible and not flagged as restricted, it was reasonable to assume that they were permitted games under the bonus conditions.
6. System Allowing Bets Above the Alleged Limit
Another important factor is that the casino platform allowed the wagers to be placed without any warning or system restriction.
If a strict maximum bet rule of $20 truly applies during bonus wagering, a fair system should automatically prevent wagers that exceed this limit. Instead, the system accepted the bets normally and allowed gameplay to continue without any notification that a rule was being violated.
Only after a withdrawal request was submitted did the casino review the betting history and use those wagers as justification to void the winnings.
7. Transparency Concerns
This situation raises concerns about transparency and fair play because:
The maximum bet rule referenced by the casino is not clearly stated in the general Terms & Conditions.
The casino system allowed the wagers to be placed without restriction.
The games played were not marked as restricted or ineligible.
The issue was only raised after a withdrawal request was submitted.
From a player’s perspective, this creates the impression that gameplay was permitted and valid until winnings were requested.
8. Requested Resolution
I respectfully request that this matter be reviewed by the relevant authority and that the casino be asked to provide:
The exact rule or promotional terms that clearly define the alleged $20 maximum bet restriction.
Proof that these specific terms were clearly presented and accepted before the gameplay began.
The full wagering log supporting the casino’s claim of rule violation.
Clarification as to why the casino platform allowed bets above the alleged limit without any restriction or warning.
If the rule was not clearly communicated or enforced by the system, I respectfully request that the casino be instructed to honor the withdrawal of $100 that was requested from my account.
9. Conclusion
My intention has always been to play within the rules of the platform. I did not intentionally violate any terms, and the games I played were accessible and not restricted at the time of play.
For these reasons, I believe the voiding of my winnings was unjustified and I respectfully request a fair and transparent review of this case.
Thank you for taking the time to review this complaint.
Submitted by:
David Uwimana
Account ID: parzivo
Email sent by casino
Dear David,
Thank for your patience regarding your withdrawal of $100.00 via Bitcoin.
While reviewing your account we've noticed that the following rule was broken:
7- While playing with Bonus money, in any of its kinds, the maximum bet amount is $20.00, either in any pay line or wager in any game. Any winnings coming from bets that are higher than this maximum limit, while using bonus money, partially or totally, are void and no withdrawal can be processed. In this case, any balance could be removed at the casino's sole discretion.
Wagers were made 12 times when playing the games Ripcord Rush and Galaxy Blast with an average bet of $78.08 during the bonus playthrough.
As the max bet rule has been broken your winnings and your bonus were voided.
Kindly have a look at the casino Terms and Conditions to avoid breaking any of our rules in the future which may result in your winnings being voided
Should you require any further information or assistance, please feel free to contact us.
Yours sincerely,
June
SlotsPlus Financial Services
Disputed amount: 100$
Casino: Slots Plus
Case #: 4036
.
Translation 
