Rooster Bet Casino - Isplata igraču je odložena.

Complaint against Rooster.bet – $10,500 winnings voided after the casino allowed me to play and withdraw

I am filing this complaint regarding Rooster.bet voiding approximately $10,500 from my balance and only allowing me to keep approximately $308 after I had completed the cashback wagering requirements.

I received a cashback bonus of approximately $30. I understand that Rooster.bet’s terms state that cashback has a 10× wagering requirement and a maximum win/withdrawable limit of 10× the bonus amount.

However, my complaint is not simply about the existence of this term. My concern is how Rooster.bet applied the restriction in practice.

After completing the wagering requirements, my balance was displayed as real money. The casino allowed me to continue playing with the balance without any warning that my winnings were still subject to a maximum-win restriction.

I initially withdrew approximately $400 and left around $79 in my account. I then continued playing and turned the remaining balance into several thousand dollars. I subsequently made withdrawal requests of approximately $3,000 and later another approximately $3,000. These withdrawals were accepted and remained pending.

My total balance eventually reached approximately $10,500.

At no point during this process did the casino clearly warn me that my balance was still restricted to approximately $300 because of the cashback bonus. The balance was presented to me as real money, and the casino’s system allowed me to place bets and accumulate the winnings.

Only afterwards, when my withdrawals were being processed, Rooster.bet manually applied the maximum-win restriction and reduced my balance to approximately $308.

I contacted customer support several times. The casino acknowledged that its system does not automatically apply the maximum-win restriction to all bonuses and that the situation may require manual checking by the Finance Team. I was also told that the system allowed me to play even though the casino later claimed that the excess winnings were not withdrawable.

I believe this raises serious questions about fairness and transparency:

Why was I allowed to continue playing with a balance displayed as real money after completing the cashback wagering requirements?

Why was I not clearly warned that my balance was still subject to a maximum-win restriction?

Why did the casino allow withdrawal requests of approximately $3,000 each to be submitted and remain pending without informing me that the withdrawals exceeded the supposed maximum?

Why was the restriction only enforced after I had accumulated approximately $10,500?

If the casino’s system knew or should have known about the maximum-win restriction, why was the balance not corrected immediately?

Is it fair for the casino to allow a player to wager and accumulate winnings, display those funds as real money, and only afterwards manually remove almost the entire balance?

I am not claiming that the bonus terms do not contain a maximum-win clause. My complaint is that the casino failed to transparently enforce that restriction while I was playing and instead allowed me to believe that the funds shown in my account were legitimate withdrawable real-money funds.

I request that Casino Guru investigate whether Rooster.bet handled this situation fairly and consistently with its own bonus terms and fair-gambling principles.

Disputed amount: approximately $10,500

I have screenshots of the balance, withdrawal requests, bonus terms, and the complete communication with Rooster.bet support and can provide them as evidence.

I would like Rooster.bet to reconsider the decision and pay the disputed winnings, or at minimum provide a clear and technically supported explanation of why the system allowed these bets and withdrawals while the balance was displayed as real money.

Important notice:

Casino Guru will never ask for payments or access to your accounts to complete KYC. If someone claims to be from Casino Guru and does that, do not share any information.

We only contact players through this official complaint thread or via @casino.guru e-mail addresses. Always check the sender’s domain and verify your complaint resolver’s e-mail address by clicking on their avatar visible inside the official complaint thread.

If anything seems suspicious, contact us directly.

Stay safe.

Dear Nazarhor,

Thank you very much for submitting your complaint. We are sorry to hear about the issue with your withdrawal and understand your concern. However, please bear in mind that it’s quite usual for withdrawals to take a couple of days or even weeks to get fully processed. This means that it may take some time before your money appears in your account. This delay may be caused by unfinished KYC verification or a high volume of withdrawal requests.
That’s why we advise players to be patient, cooperate fully with casino, and wait at least 14 days after requesting their withdrawals before submitting a complaint.

If your account has been successfully verified, your game history checked, your withdrawal approved by the casino, and you still haven't received your winnings by 14 days since requesting the withdrawal, we will intervene and do our best to help you.
Thank you in advance for your patience and understanding.

Best regards,
Complaints Resolution Center

I’m sorry to hear about your negative experience. Please allow me to ask a few questions to better understand the situation.

• When exactly did you activate and finish wagering the bonus? If it was completed on the same date, please specify the start and end times.
• After completing wagering the bonus, what was the exact amount that you won?
• You were aware of the bonus win limit. Were the winnings capped any time after completing the bonus?
• When (exact date) did you request $400?
• Could you please confirm whether your casino account balance was divided into real money and bonus money balances?

Thank you in advance for your answers.

Hi Jean, thank you for looking into my case. I’ll answer each question as accurately as possible.

• I activated the cashback bonus and completed the wagering requirement on the same day. I will provide the exact date and times from my account history/screenshots if needed.

• After completing the wagering requirement, my balance was approximately $400. I then requested a $400 withdrawal, leaving approximately $79 in my account.

• From the remaining $79, I continued playing and increased the balance to approximately $6,000 the same day. I later made additional withdrawals of approximately $3,000 and $3,000, and eventually my total pending withdrawals/balance reached approximately $10,500.

• I was aware that the cashback had a maximum win limit. However, the important issue is that after the wagering requirement was completed, the casino continued to display my balance as real money and allowed me to continue betting and requesting withdrawals. The winnings were not capped or removed at the time they were generated.

• The $400 withdrawal was requested on [2 Aug 00:33]. I can provide the exact date/time and withdrawal history.

• As far as I could see, my account balance was displayed as real money after completing the wagering requirement. I was not shown a separate bonus balance or any warning that the winnings I was generating were still subject to being voided later.

This is the main reason I believe the situation should be reviewed beyond simply applying the maximum win term. The casino’s system allowed me to continue playing with the balance, accepted my bets, and allowed withdrawals to be requested, while only later removing the winnings and reducing the balance to approximately $308.

I am happy to provide screenshots, transaction history, withdrawal history and any other evidence you need.

It was always real money after I completed the wagering requirements

Am i going to get a response??

it was all real money

Dear Nazarhor,

Thank you for your cooperation and for providing all the necessary information. I truly appreciate the time and effort you’ve taken to share everything with us so far.

Your complaint will now move to the next stage of our process and be handled by your dedicated Resolver, Michal K., (michal.k@casino.guru). This is a standard step in our procedure, as the Resolver will take over communication with the casino directly and manage your case from this point onward.

No action is required from you right now. Your Resolver will reach out through this thread if any additional details are needed. You can rest assured that your case is in very capable hands.

I wish you the best of luck and hope your case will be resolved to your satisfaction soon.

Kind regards,

Jean

Hello Nazarhor,

I'm Michal, and I have taken over your complaint. I have reviewed the case, and I will contact the casino to obtain further clarification and evidence regarding the circumstances and see how I can assist in resolving the matter.

I would also like to invite Rooster Bet Casino to join the discussion.

Dear Rooster Bet Casino,

I would kindly request your clarification regarding the sequence of events in this matter.

From my preliminary review, I share the player's concern that there appears to have been insufficient communication or notification regarding the restrictions that remained applicable to winnings acquired from funds that, on the surface, appeared to already represent real money balances. This raises questions from both a transparency and consumer protection standpoint.

In order to conduct a thorough and independent assessment of the case, I would appreciate your response along with any relevant evidence or documentation concerning this matter.

Should there be any additional circumstances or factors relevant to this case that cannot be disclosed publicly, you are welcome to share them directly with me at michal.k@casino.guru or via our MS Teams chat. I am happy to treat any such information with the appropriate level of confidentiality.

I trust that we can work together to clarify the situation and reach an appropriate resolution.

I look forward to your cooperation.

Dear Casino Guru,

Thank you for taking over the case and for the opportunity to clarify.

Here are the facts from our side:

On the account in question, the player received a Level 2 Monthly Cashback of 30.87 CAD. Cashback is classified as a bonus under our terms and carries a 10x wagering requirement and a maximum win/withdrawable limit of 10x the bonus amount. In this case that equals 308.70 CAD, which is the amount the player retained.

Regarding the central point raised, that the player was able to continue betting and submit further withdrawal requests after the wagering requirement had been met, this is addressed directly in our bonus terms, clause 1.7:

"1.7. Cashback and Cash Rewards are considered bonuses unless otherwise stated, and all general bonus rules apply. These carry a 10x wagering requirement (unless specified) and a maximum win/withdrawable limit of 10x the bonus amount. After wagering is completed, the maximum win/withdrawable limit remains active. If the player continues playing without withdrawing, the funds remain bonus-derived and subject to the same maximum win/withdrawable limit, regardless of any further winnings."

The same principle is reflected in clause 1.8, which confirms that a maximum win restriction persists after the wagering requirement has been completed:

"1.8. The maximum withdrawal limit from a no-deposit bonus, including no-deposit free spins, is €50 (50 EUR, 50 USD, 75 CAD, 75 AUD, 75 NZD, 500 NOK, 1000 ZAR, 0.00120000 BTC, 0.030000000 ETH, 0.90000000 LTC, 0.25000000 BCH, 750.00000000 DOG, 50.00000000 USDT, 125.000000 XRP, 0.20000000 BNB, 200.000000 ADA, 700.000000 TRX). 

This maximum win restriction persists even after the completion of the wagering requirement. The maximum you will ever be able to withdraw from funds associated with a no-deposit bonus is €50. Exceptions can be made for loyal players, and in such cases, the maximum win amount may be increased. To request a withdrawal, you must fully verify your account and make a minimum deposit."

Completion of wagering therefore does not remove the cap. The funds remained bonus-derived for as long as they stayed in play, and the cap applied to the resulting balance irrespective of how far it grew.

On the sequence of events: withdrawal requests are submitted by the player and reviewed before payment. Submission does not constitute approval. The requests in question were pending review, and the maximum win limit was applied during that review, before any payment was released. The player was paid the full amount permitted under the terms of the bonus.

We are of course happy to provide the bonus issue record, the wagering log and the withdrawal request timeline directly to you if that assists your assessment.

Thanks!

Thank you. I am not disputing that the terms contained a maximum win/withdrawable limit. My concern is how that limit was applied to my specific situation.

Rooster.bet confirms that after I completed the wagering requirement, I was still able to continue playing, the system accepted my bets, and I was also able to submit multiple withdrawal requests for significantly larger amounts. Couple of my withdrawal requests for approximately 3000 CAD remained pending for two days.

If the system and operator considered all of these funds to be subject to a 308.70 CAD maximum from the beginning, I would like Rooster.bet to explain:

Why was I allowed to continue playing after completing the wagering requirement without the system applying or displaying the maximum win restriction?

Why did the system allow and accept withdrawal requests for thousands of CAD?

Why was the approximately 10,500 CAD balance left pending for two days instead of the alleged maximum being applied immediately?

At what exact point, and on what basis, was the entire balance determined to remain "bonus-derived"?

Please provide the bonus record, complete wagering log, and withdrawal request timeline that Rooster.bet itself has offered to provide.

I would also ask Casino Guru to specifically examine Rooster.bet’s reference to clause 1.8. Clause 1.8 appears to concern no-deposit bonuses, whereas my case concerns a Level 2 Monthly Cashback. Please verify whether clause 1.8 is actually applicable to this specific bonus.

Again, I am not arguing that a maximum win limit can never exist. My concern is whether it is fair and properly enforceable to apply that restriction retroactively after the operator’s system allowed me to continue playing and submit substantial withdrawal requests without any warning, restriction, or indication that the resulting balance would later be voided.

Dear Rooster Bet Casino,

Thank you for your response.

Please forward all of the above-mentioned evidence relating to this matter to michal.k@casino.guru for an independent review.

I would also appreciate it if you could provide your comments and clarification regarding the points raised by the player.

We would like to ask the casino to reply to this complaint. We are extending the timer by 7 days. If the casino fails to respond in the set time frame, we will close the complaint as ‘unresolved’ which may negatively affect its rating.

Dear Casino Guru,

I would like to clarify that the $10,500 in winnings was not generated directly from the $30 cashback bonus.

I completed the required wagering, after which the balance became withdrawable. I then successfully made a withdrawal from that balance. After that, I continued playing with the remaining withdrawable funds and generated the subsequent winnings.

Rooster Bet has already paid me $308.70 as the maximum win from the cashback bonus. Therefore, if they claim that the remaining $10,500 is also subject to the cashback maximum-win limit, I ask them to provide clear evidence showing that these winnings were specifically generated from the $30 bonus funds rather than from the withdrawable balance remaining after the wagering requirement was completed.

Dear Nazarhor,

Just to confirm, you mentioned: I completed the required wagering, after which the balance became withdrawable. I then successfully made a withdrawal from that balance. After that, I continued playing with the remaining withdrawable funds and generated the subsequent winnings.

Do I understand correctly that the remaining withdrawable funds you had in your balance at that time still stemmed from the cashback bonus?

Hi Michal,

I want to make sure the most important part of my case is clear. I completed all wagering requirements and all conditions of the cashback bonus. After that, I withdrew $400 from my balance, which was pending, and approximately $79 remained in my account.

I then continued playing with that remaining $79 and turned it into approximately $10,500. These were not winnings from an unfinished wagering requirement — the bonus requirements had already been completed before this gameplay took place.

I understand that Rooster is relying on the maximum-win rule, but considering that I had already completed the bonus conditions, was able to request a withdrawal,deposit and was then allowed to continue playing with the remaining balance and generate these winnings, I believe there are genuine grounds for reconsidering the outcome.

I am not asking for the case to be treated as if the bonus terms never existed. I am asking for a fair financial resolution given the circumstances. The $308.70 already paid as bonus outcome is not a reasonable resolution from my perspective considering what happened afterwards.

I’m asking to push Rooster.bet to make a meaningful settlement offer on this case? I am willing to be reasonable about the final amount, but I would really like to resolve this with a fair payment rather than simply closing the case at $308.70.

Thank you for looking into this.

Also, I would like to mention that I have already been waiting 14 days for this complaint to be resolved. The casino was given two separate 7-day periods to respond, so I have already waited the full 14 days, and I am now being asked for further clarification. I have provided the information and documentation requested throughout the process, so I would really appreciate it if the case could now move toward an actual resolution and a fair settlement rather than another lengthy delay.

Regards

Nazar

Dear Nazarhor,

I acknowledge your response and understand your wish to bring the case to a conclusion. However, complaints can develop as new information becomes available during the investigation, and it is important that all relevant circumstances are properly considered.

Please also bear in mind that the absence of a response from the casino in the public complaint thread does not necessarily mean that no communication is taking place. We may communicate with the casino directly, particularly when the information or evidence involved contains sensitive details that cannot be disclosed publicly.

While I agree to some extent that the situation was less than ideal from a user-experience perspective, this does not necessarily mean that the conditions accepted when claiming the bonus were no longer applicable. From a strictly contractual perspective, the available information may support the casino’s position.

Casinos are generally entitled to establish the conditions governing their promotions, while players are expected to familiarise themselves with the applicable bonus rules before participating. If any condition is unclear, it is advisable to seek clarification from the casino’s support team before claiming the offer. At the same time, all material restrictions should be communicated to players in a clear and transparent manner.

For this reason, I am currently trying to establish whether it was made sufficiently clear that the maximum winnings limit would continue to apply even after the cashback bonus wagering requirements had been completed.

Dear Rooster Bet Casino,

I look forward to your timely response to my email.

Hi Michael,

Referring to 1.7 of our Bonus Terms, where it is clearly stated, that the max cashout still applies, even after fulfilling the wagering requirements. Thanks!

I would also like to add one important point that I believe is relevant to the question of whether the bonus was still active and how the casino’s system treated my balance.

During the same period, I was able to purchase bonus features in the games for approximately $200–$300 per purchase.

If Rooster Bet considers my $10,500 balance to have remained subject to an active cashback bonus with a maximum cashout of $308, then I would like to understand how its system allowed me to continue playing in this manner and make bonus-feature purchases of $200–$300 from the same balance.

These were not small bets around the $30 cashback amount. I was using hundreds of dollars of the balance for individual game-feature purchases, while the casino’s system continued to allow this without any warning that the entire balance was still restricted by the maximum cashout.This is especially important because Rooster Bet is now saying that the maximum cashout continued to apply throughout the entire period. If that was the case, the system should have clearly indicated that the balance was still restricted by the bonus, or at minimum the casino should be able to explain why it allowed me to use the balance as normal cash balance and make $200–$300 feature purchases

I believe this distinction is important when assessing whether the casino applied the bonus terms fairly and transparently in my particular case.

Dear Nazarhor,

I can quite understand that you're doing your best to make your case, and I don't hold that against you in the slightest. If I may, I should just like to clarify a couple of points:

Would you mind letting me know how many bonuses you've claimed at Rooster Bet Casino so far? And have I understood correctly that this cashback bonus wasn't the first one you've claimed?

Might I also ask whether you'd had the chance to read through the bonus terms and conditions before claiming it?

Hi Michal,

I’ve been using Rooster Bet since 2023-2024, so unfortunately I can’t give you an exact number of bonuses I’ve claimed over the years. There have been quite a large number of them, and I’ve also deposited a significant amount with Rooster Bet during this time.

Yes, this cashback was definitely not the first bonus I had claimed. I have used many different bonuses with Rooster Bet

Regarding the terms, yes, I had the opportunity to view them. However, I did not understand that the maximum-win restriction would still apply to my balance after I had completed the wagering requirements. The situation was especially confusing because my balance was then displayed as "Real Money".

More importantly, after completing the wagering requirements, I was able to continue playing and making withdrawals. I also contacted Rooster Bet support twice during the relevant period — including about my withdrawals and whether there was any issue with my account — and I was not warned that any maximum-win restriction was still being applied.

This is the main reason I believe my case deserves consideration. I’m not saying that the bonus terms should simply be ignored. My concern is that the restriction was not communicated to me clearly in practice, despite the way my account was presented and despite my direct communication with support.

Considering my long history with Rooster Bet, the significant amount I have deposited there, and the circumstances surrounding the confiscation, I would really appreciate it if you could push them for a meaningful goodwill settlement, even, if recovering the full amount is not possible.

Thanks again for looking into this.

Dear Nazarhor,

As I understand from your responses, you are a long-standing player at Rooster Bet Casino, have previously claimed several bonuses, and are familiar with the applicable Bonus Terms and Conditions.

The relevant part of Clause 1.7 states:

"After wagering is completed, the maximum win/withdrawable limit remains active. If the player continues playing without withdrawing, the funds remain bonus-derived and subject to the same maximum win/withdrawable limit, regardless of any further winnings."

It has also been established that the disputed gameplay was conducted entirely using funds derived from the cashback bonus. Completion of the wagering requirement made the permitted amount available for withdrawal, but under Clause 1.7, it did not remove the maximum winnings limit from the remaining balance.

Could you therefore clarify which part of this condition you consider unclear or inapplicable to your circumstances?

The fact that the system allowed you to continue playing or purchase game features does not, by itself, remove the maximum winnings restriction. A maximum cashout limit is not the same as a maximum bet limit. Similarly, the ability to submit a withdrawal request does not mean that the requested amount has been approved, as withdrawals remain subject to review before being processed.

As previously stated, I can agree with you that the situation was less than ideal from a user-experience perspective. We advocate for bonus restrictions to be clearly displayed and, wherever technically possible, automatically enforced by the casino’s system. However, not all casino platforms support such automatic controls, and the absence of a system restriction does not necessarily invalidate a clearly stated condition accepted when claiming the promotion.

Based on the information currently available, the less-than-ideal user experience does not mean that the applicable bonus rules cease to apply or that this should be ignored by the casino team.

In light of the above, could you please explain the specific contractual or factual basis on which you believe you are entitled to receive any amount beyond the maximum winnings of CAD 308.70 already paid to you, noting that those winnings were, technically speaking, derived from complimentary funds provided by the casino in the first place?

Hi Michal,

Thank you for your explanation. I understand your point regarding Clause 1.7, and I am not arguing about that

My concern is how Rooster Bet applied this restriction in practice and the way the situation was presented to me as a player.

After I completed the wagering requirement, the funds were shown in my account as Real Money!!! and I was able to withdraw them! I made a withdrawal and left the remaining balance in my account. I then continued playing with that remaining balance and won approximately $6,000.

At that point, there was no clear warning on my account telling me that despite the wagering requirement being completed and the balance being displayed as real money, my entire remaining balance and any subsequent winnings were still restricted to a maximum of $308.70.

More importantly, I contacted Rooster Bet support about my withdrawals and specifically asked whether there was any issue with my account. I was told not to worry! I was also able to submit multiple withdrawal requests, including requests totaling approximately $10,500 over two days. None of these withdrawals were rejected immediately) with a warning that I was subject to a $308.70 maximum-win restriction. They were only rejected later, after the winnings had already accumulated.🤷‍♂️😂

This is why I believe the issue is more than simply "the terms contained a 10x clause." I accept that the clause was written in the terms, but the casino’s actual conduct gave me a completely different indication of the status of my balance.

I would also ask Casino Guru to look carefully at Rooster Bet’s statement that the disputed gameplay was entirely conducted using cashback-derived funds. I believe this is an important factual point that should be demonstrated by the casino’s transaction and game history, rather than simply asserted.

In particular, I would like Rooster Bet to provide the transaction/betting history showing how the balance from the completed cashback wagering was carried forward into the disputed gameplay and how they calculated that the entire approximately $10,500 in winnings remained subject to the original $30.87 cashback limit.

I am not asking you to ignore the casino’s terms. I am asking you to consider the complete circumstances: the wagering requirement was completed, the balance was presented as real money, withdrawals were permitted, I contacted support and was not warned about the restriction, multiple withdrawals were accepted for review, and the restriction was only applied after the substantial winnings had already been generated.

Even if you ultimately consider the clause technically applicable, I believe these circumstances justify a meaningful compensation from Rooster Bet, rather than leaving me with only the $308.70 that was returned.

I would therefore appreciate it if you could ask Rooster Bet to reconsider the amount returned and make a reasonable return offer.

Thank you for taking another look at this.

Hi Michal,

Thank you for continuing to look into my case and sorry for bothering again

At this point, I would really appreciate your help in trying to reach a financial settlement with Rooster Bet.

I understand that Rooster is relying on its bonus terms, but I still believe that what happened was seriously unfair. After completing the wagering, my balance was shown as real money, I was able to make withdrawals, and I contacted support twice about my withdrawals and whether everything was okay with my account. I was not warned that a maximum win limit was still going to be applied to my balance.

I then continued playing and ended up winning a significant amount. I had around CAD 10,500 in pending withdrawals, and only after this did the casino reject the withdrawals

Considering the way the balance was presented, the communication I received from support, my long history with Rooster Bet, and the amount of money involved, I do not feel that simply returning CAD 300 is a fair resolution.

I am not asking you to ignore Rooster’s position or to guarantee that they must pay the full amount. What I am asking is that you please push Rooster Bet for a meaningful goodwill compensation for everything that happened.

I have spent a lot of money with this casino over the years, and in this situation I genuinely feel that I was treated unfairly. I would really like Rooster to make a reasonable financial gesture

Thank you for your help, Michal. I really hope we can find a fair financial resolution to this case.

Best regards,

Nazar