SlotNeo Casino - γενική συζήτηση (σελίδα 7)

Are you asking for help contacting another ADR service? That doesn't seem likely, frankly. Im afraid we have no direct connection moreover one of the basic rules usualy says that no third party can complain on behalf of someone else.

i just had a problem contacting the ADR. I am waiting for a mail.

Actually the casino offered me paying half of my balance before the complaint on casinoguru; and now i lost everything after the process here. The operator also know i never had linked accounts and never had any benefit. I am sure of that. I dont know what kind of proof they showed to Michal; but still they didnt explain me in what name this linked account created? what benefit did i get with that linked account ? Now, As i am 100% sure about myself that i have only one account, I think the casino operators can infringe on any players balance due to linked accounts etc.

Good game well played

File a fraud complaint with the police where you live. You'll probably lose about an hour of your time—nothing more. There isn't any ADR available.

But they should have an ADR as every casino should have. Isn't this another reason to blacklist the casino dear casinoguru? At least an explanation is required from casino

I understand this is a frustrating situation, and I get you are convinced nothing unusual occurred on your side. The mediator assessed things differently; full details without concrete proof have been described in the complaint. Did you reach out to the ADR despite the problem you mentioned, please? Some licenses do not require casinos to offer ADR service to players. Casino Guru for example, serves as an independent ADR.

Dear Radka,

Thank you for your reply.

Yes, I contacted the ADR on 18 July and submitted my complaint together with all supporting documents. Unfortunately, I have not yet received any response.

I also attempted to use the ADR contact form several times, but it consistently returned the error:

"There was a problem with your message. Please try again."

I am currently waiting for their reply.

I would also like to mention one point that still concerns me. Although the final decision was based on an alleged connection to multiple accounts, I still do not know the general basis of that conclusion. I fully understand that confidential evidence may not be disclosed. However, I was never informed what type of connection was allegedly identified, nor was it explained what unfair advantage or benefit I supposedly gained from these alleged linked accounts. Without at least a general explanation, it is very difficult for me to understand or respond to such a serious allegation. 

also have one question that I still cannot understand.

If the casino had already identified what it considered to be sufficient evidence of linked or multiple accounts, why did it request another complete set of highly sensitive KYC documents from me on 28 April?

Those documents included my identity documents, bank statements, salary slip and other personal information.

If the alleged multiple-account issue had already been sufficient to justify closing my account, I do not understand why I was asked to submit even more sensitive personal documents instead of being informed that the account would be closed.

This sequence of events is one of the main reasons why I remain confused about how my case was handled.

Thank you again for your time.

Kind regards

I expected a higher level of professionalism. Before making a general statement about ADR requirements, you should have verified the obligations imposed by the operator's licensing authority. This is not a matter of opinion. Anjouan Gaming expressly requires all licensed operators to engage at least one Authority-approved ADR provider. Therefore, the issue is not whether "some licences" require ADR, but whether SlotNeo complied with the specific obligations of its own licensing framework.

Despite this, SlotNeo refused to identify its affiliated ADR, and even its complaints form on the website was not functioning. I contacted an approved ADR, only to be informed that the operator was not registered with them.

Another aspect that concerns me is what appears to be a recurring pattern in many SlotNeo complaints. New allegations or additional justifications seem to be introduced only after a player challenges the initial decision. If that perception is accurate, it raises legitimate concerns about procedural fairness. Players should be informed of the reasons affecting their case from the outset and be given a meaningful opportunity to respond, rather than facing new allegations as the dispute progresses.

Furthermore, a fair dispute resolution process should allow both parties to respond to new allegations before a conclusion is reached. In my case, the mediator accepted confidential allegations from the casino and initially closed the complaint without giving me an opportunity to address those allegations or submit a rebuttal. That raises legitimate concerns about procedural fairness.

Before suggesting that I should simply "contact the ADR," it would have been appropriate to verify whether the operator was actually complying with its ADR obligations under its own licensing framework.

Maybe it's time for a rebrand. Instead of "SlotNeo", it should be called DepositsWelcomeWithdrawalsForbidden.com...just a suggestion

Hello,

I believe I honestly responded to questions or opinions related to your complaint, and thus I cannot say anything new. A few offshore licenses decided to add an ADR list of services for the players, but you can see how it works in reality. In my opinion, you are not the only player with similar experience, but that's basically all I can add.

For us it's an unverified third-party toot of sorts.

Hello, in my opinion the other player's posts show us that the ADR list of services exists but the usage of those companies is something beyond our scope. We aim to inform players about which licensing party provided the license and a detailed guide that assesses the operational model. Casino Guru itself works as an independent ADR service not related to any license, especially off-shore. In my opinion, your interpretation of the ADR situation is one of the possible scenarios for more caring casinos.

What I have learned from the hints in real life is the operator or casino is not required to have "ADR itself"; the license has provided the list and the rest is in reality, falling up to the players. 😐

https://casino.guru/licensing-authorities/comoros-license

https://anjouangaming.com/resources/authorized-adr-providers/

Thank you for keeping this casino in the spotlight, because its Safety Index is not currently very high.

Hello dear victims of this Slotneo casino.I heard about a campaign on askgamblers.com about funding players who have been victims of thief casinos.

https://cashy.com/justice-fund

I think its worth trying.

Kind regards

Hey,

I've read a little about this in the past as well. Definitely be careful with these kinds of websites.

For example, I would want to know how a website like this is funded and what happens if they run out of funds. It's still a relatively new project, so it hasn't really been proven over time. There are only a few cases that the website claims to have resolved.

I've also read that there are certain conditions, and I was surprised by the fact that players apparently have to make some kind of video with someone, which may then be publicly available, in exchange for receiving money that the casino owes them.

Have you already tried this process yourself?

They partnered with AskGamblers (it's in their official forum as well, about the partnership). Cashy is posting videos and TX hashes for every transaction they helped with. They are transparent about it.

I understand. If they can keep this up, I’ll only be glad to see them helping players who are in difficult situations.

There may be some questions around how everything works, but as long as they’re able to answer them clearly and everything proves to be legitimate, then I don’t see a problem with it.

hello again, its been more than 4 months since my account is closed in slotneo with more than 2000 dollars of balance inside, for the reason: "linked accounts". i was thinking about all process i experienced with casinoguru and raised some questions about my case; and i think casinoguru should consider those:

First of all, I have one simple question regarding the "linked accounts" finding.

I understand that the accounts were linked mainly because they were accessed from the same IP. I am not asking for IP addresses or any confidential detection methods.

Since Casino Guru concluded that these accounts were operated by me, could you please tell me under which first and last names these accounts were registered?

If they were registered under my name, confirming this should be straightforward. If they were registered under different names, then according to your conclusion I was still the person operating them — so I believe I should be able to know which identities you are referring to.

I am not asking for any other personal information, only the names under which the allegedly linked accounts were registered.

Kind regards

I understand why you want a clearer explanation of which accounts were allegedly connected to yours, especially since you dispute that connection.

However, I don’t have access to the confidential evidence Michal reviewed, so I can’t confirm whose names those accounts were registered under or whether a shared IP was the main basis for the decision. The public complaint conclusion doesn’t specify that.

Names can also identify other people, so I can’t promise that those details can be disclosed. The best person to address this specific question is Michal at [email protected]. You could try to ask what general information about the connection can be shared without revealing another person’s details. But I don't promise these kind of things will be revealed that is because a lot of evidence we naturally don't disclose to other players.

Your complaint remains closed, but requesting clarification of the existing decision is different from submitting a new complaint.

what i like to say is; i am accused of having linked multiple accounts based on some evidence about " same IP". So if i have multiple linked accounts and benefited from them; then i should already know all details about those accounts such as name, surname, mail etc. If they say they cant share this info with me, then how could they accused me of "using" those multiple accounts??!! there is a logical inconsistency here.

1)So if i am accused of having linked accounts; then i should already know the details about those accounts. So why not tell me the basic details of those accounts if they are still standing behind their claims?!

2) What happened to those accounts that i am accused of being linked to with same IP? Are their accounts also cancelled? or Slotneo planning to cancel their account only when they make a big win at last?! I like to see the proof that their account is cancelled at the same time that my account was cancelled, if they are cancelled of course.

I think i have every right to ask those questions and i expect answers

You’re entitled to ask those questions, and I understand your argument: if you dispute operating those accounts, you want enough information to understand and challenge the connection.

However, the fact that information isn’t disclosed doesn’t by itself establish that the finding is contradictory. I also can’t confirm your assumption that the decision rested only on a shared IP.

Your question about whether the other accounts were closed is a separate point. I don’t know their status or what action SlotNeo took, so I can’t provide that confirmation or speculate about their motives.

Please include both questions in your clarification request to Michal. He reviewed the evidence and can assess what explanation can be shared. I can discuss your concerns here, but I can’t resolve these factual questions from the public record or promise disclosure of other accounts’ details.