What can a player do when the casino, ADR providers, regulator and game provider do not respond?

I would like to start a discussion about my current situation because I honestly do not know what practical route is left for a player when almost every party involved either does not respond, refuses to provide evidence, or redirects the matter elsewhere.

I currently have three separate disputed casino cases involving Sweet Bonanza / Pragmatic Play, with a total disputed amount of €6,667.34.

1. Buff Bets – €4,140

Buff Bets confiscated approximately €4,140 in winnings and accused me of serious violations including bonus abuse/manipulation-related conduct.

The case was investigated through Casino Guru. Casino Guru requested supporting evidence from the casino, but the complaint was ultimately closed as:

"Unresolved – Insufficient Evidence from Casino."

Despite that outcome, I still have not received the money.

I also contacted the relevant Anjouan licensing/oversight channels and an ADR provider, but I have not received a meaningful resolution.

2. Blindluck – €1,567.15

Blindluck confiscated €1,567.15 based on an alleged bonus max-bet violation.

This case was also submitted to Casino Guru.

Blindluck did not cooperate with the complaint process and the case was eventually closed as:

"Unresolved – No Reaction Policy."

Again, the money was not returned.

3. Blindluck – new €960.19 confiscation

More recently, Blindluck confiscated another €960.19.

This time they referred generally to clause 5.9.5 of their Terms & Conditions.

The problem is that this clause contains several completely different possible allegations, including VPN/IP manipulation, forged documents, bonus abuse, fraud/collusion and software-assisted play.

Blindluck has still not told me which specific allegation actually applies to me or provided the evidence supporting it.

I had no active bonus, my bonus balance was €0.00, my account was KYC verified, and I played normally on my own phone.

Blindluck stated that its decision is final and said that supporting evidence would be provided to the licensing authority and ADR service if required.

However, I have repeatedly asked Blindluck to identify which ADR provider is actually appointed to handle disputes against them, and they have still not provided that information.

I have now submitted a new Casino Guru complaint concerning this separate €960.19 confiscation.

The bigger problem: where is the actual dispute-resolution mechanism?

I have contacted or attempted to obtain assistance from:

Blindluck

Buff Bets

Anjouan licensing/oversight channels

recognised ADR providers

Casino Guru

Pragmatic Play / Sweet Bonanza

One ADR provider, iGamingADR, did respond and confirmed that they are not appointed for either Blindluck or Buff Bets.

Other ADR routes I have contacted have so far not provided a substantive response.

I have also contacted Pragmatic Play and asked them to verify whether the disputed Sweet Bonanza game rounds were genuine, whether the operators were authorised to offer their games, and whether their systems detected any manipulation or irregularity. I am currently still waiting for their response.

I have also submitted a formal Data Subject Access Request to Blindluck requesting account, game, IP/device, KYC, fraud/risk and investigation records. Blindluck confirmed that this request is being processed.

What concerns me most is that I have spent months trying to use the supposedly available complaint and dispute-resolution mechanisms, yet I still cannot find a party that will actually review the evidence and make an enforceable decision.

I am not claiming that all of these organisations are working together or deliberately ignoring me. I am simply describing what has happened in practice.

Casino Guru has already concluded in one case that the casino provided insufficient evidence, and in another case the casino did not cooperate at all. Yet as the player, I am still left without the disputed funds and without an effective route to enforce anything.

I would therefore genuinely appreciate advice from people with experience in this area.

What practical options remain when:

the casino refuses to provide evidence;

the casino does not cooperate with Casino Guru;

the operator does not identify its appointed ADR provider;

ADR providers do not respond or say they are not appointed;

the licensing authority does not provide a substantive response;

and the player is left with thousands of euros in disputed winnings?

If anyone has dealt successfully with an Anjouan-licensed operator in a similar situation, or knows how to determine the actual appointed ADR provider for Blindluck or Buff Bets, I would especially appreciate your advice.

At this point I am not looking for another generic answer telling me to "contact the casino." I have been doing that for months.

I am looking for a realistic next step that can actually lead to an independent review or recovery of the disputed funds.

https://casino.guru/complaints/buff-bets-casino-player-s-withdrawal-process-is-delayed

https://casino.guru/complaints/blind-luck-casino-player-s-withdrawal-has-been-confiscated

In my opinion, this demonstrates why playing in offshore casinos, particularly with an AOFA license or any other weak general regulation, provides no protection in those situations. There are no workarounds because ADR services or game providers have no official control over casinos. Only the licensing authority and, if that fails, specialized gambling lawyers are the final and sole tools. 😐

If Anjouan requires every licensed operator to appoint an approved ADR provider and participation in ADR is mandatory, what is a player supposed to do when the operator refuses to identify its appointed ADR provider and the approved ADR providers contacted by the player either do not respond or confirm they are not appointed?

I think I know where you are heading. First of all, I would like to say that AOFA directly provided the list of ADR services; thus, the player can act on his own.

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

However, as you experienced on your own, licencing authority works quite differently. Honestly, it's a place where the licenses are sold in the first place; players usualy expect them to work the same way as police when something happens, but in my opinion, it's not that simple. They either give the license or not. A license can be revoked, but I see no effect for the particular player, for example. Thinking aloud now: if the licensing authority were able (or willing) to investigate players' disputes in coordination with the players, would they be in need of third-party ADR?

I guess this is the reason why players eventually seek specialized lawyers.

Thanks Radka. I understand that AOFA provides a general list of approved ADR providers, but this is exactly where I am running into a practical problem.

A list of approved ADR providers is not the same as knowing which ADR provider has actually been appointed by a specific operator.

I have already contacted ADR providers from that list. iGamingADR explicitly confirmed that they are not appointed for either Blindluck or Buff Bets, while other providers have so far not given me a substantive response.

Blindluck itself stated in writing that, in the event of a complaint, it would provide its evidence to the licensing authority and "the Alternative Dispute Resolution service." However, despite several direct requests, Blindluck has still not told me which ADR service it is referring to.

So this is the practical issue I am trying to understand:

How can a player independently start ADR if the operator refuses to identify its appointed ADR provider and the ADR providers on the general list either confirm they are not appointed or do not respond?

I completely understand your point that the licensing authority may not resolve the individual financial dispute. But if ADR is supposed to be the mechanism for resolving that individual dispute, there must surely be a practical way for the player to determine which ADR has jurisdiction.

That is the gap I am currently unable to overcome.

You are welcome. I imagine this must have been a very frustrating journey and the way you described all the efforts, it seems like the theory is really far from what the player can actually achieve.

I think you have actually found a real practical problem I did not dare to present just yet.

The thing is that I looked at the AOFA information again, and I can see the difference between what the system says in theory and what happens in practice.

The theory seems to be quite simple: licensed operators must have one or more approved ADR providers, and AOFA publishes the list of approved providers. The rules also say that the operator should inform the player about the available ADR mechanism if the complaint cannot be resolved directly.

But what I cannot find is a clear public system showing which ADR provider is actually appointed for each particular operator.

And this is exactly where your situation becomes difficult. You already contacted providers from the AOFA list, one of them told you that they are not appointed for Blindluck or Buff Bets, and the others have not given you a useful answer. At the same time, Blindluck keeps referring to "the Alternative Dispute Resolution service" but does not tell you which one.

So yes, having a list of approved ADR providers is not necessarily enough if the player does not know which one is actually responsible for the operator. I get it.

I also found another important point in the AOFA rules: AOFA makes it clear that it does not resolve individual player disputes itself. It can deal with regulatory or compliance issues, but that is different from actually deciding whether the operator owes you money.

So I honestly don't want to give you advice just for the sake of giving you something. I am not sure there is a practical step I can recommend here with any real confidence.

This is actually very close to what I meant in my previous message. From the outside, the licensing and ADR system looks quite straightforward. But when you try to use it in a real dispute, things can be much less clear.

And unfortunately, I think this may be one of those situations where specialized legal advice from someone familiar with the relevant jurisdiction is more useful than anything I could tell you from the position of a public international forum.

I am sorry I cannot give you a more useful practical route here.

Ok, I appreciate the effort, but I would strongly recommend not reaching out to someone who is promoting recovery per @gmail.com. Feel free to describe how it works in full, please. For now, though, I'm hiding the post unless the process is transparently explained involving the gmail you mentioned.

These days, one can never be too cautious, so I greatly appreciate your understanding.

Thank you, Radka. I really appreciate that you took the time to look into the AOFA information again and that you understand the practical problem I am facing.

This is exactly what has been so frustrating: on paper there appears to be an ADR route, but in practice I have not been able to establish which provider is actually appointed for the operators involved.

I have sent further follow-ups today to Anjouan, the ADR providers and the other relevant parties. Hopefully I will still receive a substantive response and finally get some clarity on how these disputes can actually be reviewed.

Thank you again for taking my situation seriously and for looking at it objectively.

You're very welcome. And honestly, I hope you get a clear answer from them this time.

I dare to say that you have already done much more than a regular player would do just to find out where a complaint can actually be submitted. That's so frustrating...

If you do receive a substantive response from Anjouan or one of the ADR providers, feel free to share it. I would actually be interested to see how they explain the process in practice.

Good luck with it, and hopefully you finally get a clear answer!

Good afternoon Radka,

Small update on the current situation, especially regarding Blindluck

I wanted to provide an update because there has now finally been some movement from Blindluck, although the ADR situation has actually become even more confusing.

Regarding my new €960.19 Blindluck complaint, Blindluck has now stated that they are willing to escalate the complaint internally for further review by the appropriate department.

I have accepted that opportunity. For the moment, I therefore think it is reasonable to give Blindluck a short period to actually perform this further internal review and see whether they finally provide a substantive explanation and evidence.

My new Casino Guru complaint concerning the €960.19 confiscation also remains open, so for now I am happy to keep things relatively quiet there while we see what Blindluck does.

However, there is a very important new development concerning ADR.

Blindluck previously told me in writing that its decision was final and that, in the event of a complaint, it would provide the relevant details and supporting evidence to:

"the licensing authority and the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) service."

Because of that statement, I repeatedly asked Blindluck one very simple question:

Which ADR provider is actually appointed for Blindluck / Green Champions Leader SRL?

After several requests, they have still never identified one.

Their latest response now states:

"This brand does not operate under a licensing authority that provides mandatory ADR services."

This is particularly confusing because Anjouan Gaming’s currently published complaint rules state that ADR participation is mandatory for all licensed operators, and its Authorized ADR Providers page states that all Anjouan-licensed operators are required to engage one or more approved ADR providers.

So I am now left with a fairly obvious unresolved contradiction:

Blindluck previously referred specifically to "the ADR service";

after repeated requests, they still refuse or are unable to identify which ADR service they meant;

they now state that their licensing authority does not provide mandatory ADR;

while the licensing authority’s own currently published rules say ADR participation is mandatory for all licensed operators.

I am not claiming from this alone that Blindluck definitely has no appointed ADR provider. But at this point, they have had many opportunities to simply name that provider and have still not done so.

There are also still important issues outstanding regarding the actual confiscation.

Blindluck has still not told me which specific part of clause 5.9.5 I allegedly violated. That clause contains several completely different allegations, including VPN/IP manipulation, forged documents, bonus abuse, fraud/collusion and software-assisted activity.

I still have not received the underlying IP/session records, game-round information, fraud/risk findings or other technical evidence that would explain why €960.19 was confiscated.

I also submitted a formal data access request. Blindluck has provided a transaction/deposit/withdrawal file, which is useful, but it does not contain many of the other categories I specifically requested, including the relevant login/IP/device records, detailed game-round information, fraud/risk flags, investigation records and the specific reason/evidence behind the decision.

Interestingly, the transaction data they provided shows the August winnings and subsequent system adjustment, and I can see no bonus transaction in August. My screenshots also show €0.00 bonus balance and no active bonus at the time of the relevant win.

So at this point my approach is:

I am giving Blindluck the opportunity they have now offered to conduct another internal review.

If they genuinely review the matter, explain exactly what they accuse me of and provide the evidence, that would at least finally move the dispute forward.

But if this new "internal review" again results only in a generic final-decision response without evidence, the ADR issue becomes even more important.

Separately, iGamingADR has already confirmed to me that it is not appointed for Blindluck or Buff Bets, and I am still waiting for useful clarification from the other ADR/regulatory channels I contacted.

Regarding Buff Bets, the €4,140 Casino Guru case remains "Unresolved – Insufficient Evidence from Casino". I have also now submitted the wider compliance/licensing concerns to Trustpilot, which has formally opened an investigation into my report concerning buffbets.com.

So there has finally been some movement, but I still do not have an independent dispute-resolution body actually reviewing either confiscation.

For Blindluck specifically, I think the fairest thing now is to give them this final opportunity to carry out the additional internal review they themselves offered.

I will update this thread again as soon as they provide their response — particularly if they finally provide the evidence or explain which ADR provider is actually responsible for their disputes

Good day to you.

Thank you for the update. I think your current approach regarding Blindluck turned out to be great. Your persistence is inspiring and thanks to all your efforts, I guess, they have now offered to review the matter internally again. I agree that it makes sense to give them a short opportunity to actually do that before taking the next step. Hopefully this time they will provide something more concrete, especially regarding the exact reason for the confiscation and the evidence behind it.

The ADR situation is still perplexing, though. The contradiction between what Blindluck told you previously and what they are saying now is certainly something I would also want clarified. At this point, I think you have asked them the same simple question enough times: which ADR provider are you actually referring to?

So I would probably leave it there for now and see what comes out of this new review. If they could provide the evidence or clearly identify their ADR provider, that would give you something concrete to work with.

Thanks for keeping me updated, and yes, definitely let me know what they come back with. I will be interested to see whether this time there is actually something substantive behind the response.

I do not recall anyone else who has experienced and achieved something like you did, by the way.

Thank you, Radka. I really appreciate you saying that.

I think the most frustrating part for me has always been the feeling of powerlessness. It is not simply that I disagree with a casino decision. There are several things in these cases that, in my opinion, very clearly do not add up, and yet as a player you are completely dependent on the casino, the regulator, ADR providers or other third parties being willing to actually investigate them.

I have been playing online casino games for more than 10 years, so I am not completely unfamiliar with how casinos, withdrawals, bonuses and verification normally work.

What made me especially suspicious in these cases was what happened after I won unusually large amounts. That was when things suddenly started becoming difficult: additional questions, changing explanations, verification problems, withdrawals being cancelled, balances being adjusted and accusations being made.

Sometimes you simply get a feeling that something is not right.

Of course, I also understand that a feeling by itself proves absolutely nothing. That is exactly why I started saving everything — screenshots, balances, bonus status, withdrawal requests, emails, verification results, transaction histories and the different explanations I received.

And looking back, I am very glad I did.

Because now I do not have to say "I think they said this" or "I remember my balance being like that." In many cases I can actually show what was displayed or what was said at the time.

That is also why the ADR situation bothers me so much. If Blindluck had simply said from the beginning, "this is our ADR provider, here are the contact details," there would hardly be a discussion about it. Instead, they first referred in writing to providing evidence to "the Alternative Dispute Resolution service," and after repeatedly asking which service they meant, I still have no name. Now they are giving a different explanation about mandatory ADR.

The same applies to the confiscation itself. I am not asking anyone to blindly believe me. I am asking them to identify what exactly I allegedly did and show the evidence for it.

For now I agree with you that giving Blindluck this new internal review opportunity is the fairest thing to do. I genuinely hope they use it to finally provide something concrete.

And if they can show clear evidence that I actually did something wrong, then at least I finally have something factual to evaluate. But if they cannot, then I think the questions surrounding these confiscations become even more serious.

Thanks again for following all of this. It has been exhausting at times, but comments like yours do make me feel that keeping all this evidence and continuing to ask the difficult questions was not pointless.

You know what? For me, you are honestly a hero and a pioneer of unknown ADR territory.

You have gone much further with all of this than I think I personally would have managed to try.

And what I find especially admirable is that, despite everything that has happened and how exhausting the process must be, you are still trying to look at the situation objectively. You are not simply saying "the casino is cheating me" and stopping there. You keep separating what you suspect from what you can actually prove, you collect the evidence, you ask specific questions and you are willing to accept an explanation if they can actually support it.

That is not something I see very often.

Honestly, I think I would have lost my patience much earlier.

So even though I obviously cannot tell you what the final outcome of these cases will be, I really do think that the way you have approached them is admirable. And I’m glad I can give you a place to explain what’s happening and have someone look at it with you objectively.

And yes, of course: keep all those screenshots, as many as you can get. You are absolutely right about that. In situations like these, a contemporaneous screenshot is worth much more than "I remember it differently."

Hopefully Blindluck now finally gives you something concrete to work with. And if they do, we can at least look at the facts rather than trying to guess what happened.

🍀

Thank you, Radka. Unfortunately, I already have another rather strange update which seems to illustrate the practical problem even further.

Blindluck had recently offered to escalate my complaint internally for a further review. I accepted that in good faith and specifically asked them to review both confiscations. I even informed Casino Guru that I was temporarily holding back further escalation so that Blindluck had a fair opportunity to complete that review.

However, Blindluck has now reverted to its previous position. They told me that I had already been given sufficient information, that they are unable to provide anything further, and that their decision is final.

So at this point I still do not know whether the "further internal review" they offered was actually carried out at all, which department supposedly conducted it, what evidence was reconsidered, or what the outcome of that review was.

But the licensing issue has now become even more confusing.

Blindluck has now explicitly told me in writing, twice, that their website does not operate under an Anjouan licence.

Their current website footer now only identifies Green Champions Leader S.R.L. in Costa Rica and does not display the Anjouan licence information.

However, the official Anjouan public licence register still currently lists Green Champions Leader SRL as a valid licensee under ALSI-202502014-FI1, and blindluck.io is specifically included among the licensed domains. The registered blindluck.io domain currently redirects to the Blindluck website at blindluck99.io.

So this has created another question that I honestly do not know how a player is supposed to resolve:

If the operator now says its website is not operating under Anjouan, while the Anjouan public register still lists the operator as valid and blindluck.io as a licensed domain, which regulatory and ADR framework actually applies to my disputes?

This is especially relevant because Blindluck previously told me that evidence would be provided to the licensing authority and "the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) service", yet they have still never identified which ADR service they meant.

I am trying to be careful not to draw conclusions that I cannot prove. There may be an explanation involving a domain or licensing change. But from a player’s perspective, it has now become almost impossible to determine even something as basic as which regulatory dispute mechanism actually applies.

I have kept screenshots and the written emails showing all of these statements.

If I receive anything substantive from Anjouan or an ADR provider I will definitely post it here. But at the moment, unfortunately, the situation seems to be becoming less clear rather than more clear.

Oh no... Honestly, this is exactly what I meant before when I said that the theory and the real-life situation can be two completely different things. But I would never expect all those plots involved.

I can really understand why you are confused now, because I would be too.

At this point, it is not even only about whether the confiscation was right or wrong. Before you can get there, you somehow have to figure out which license, which rules and which dispute mechanism actually apply to you. And that really should not be something a player has to investigate by himself.

The part about the license is especially strange to me. If Blindluck is now telling you twice in writing that they are not operating under an Anjouan license, but the Anjouan register still shows the company and blindluck.io as licensed, then I honestly have no idea what the correct explanation is either. There may be a perfectly normal reason for it, of course, and maybe something changed with the domain, the license, or the company, but this is exactly what they should explain.

And the ADR situation makes it even more confusing. If I'm still getting that correctly, they previously told you that they would provide the evidence to the licensing authority and "the ADR service", but they still cannot tell you which ADR service that actually is. Now they are saying that there is no mandatory ADR. I mean... what is a player supposed to do with that?

The internal review is also disappointing. You gave them exactly what they asked for: you accepted their offer and gave them the opportunity to look at it again. If they now simply say that you have already received enough information, without explaining whether anyone actually reviewed it or what was reviewed, then I can understand why you are questioning what that "further review" actually was.

I think you are doing the right thing by not jumping to conclusions, though. There may be an explanation for all of this that we simply don't know yet. And I really like that you keep making that distinction between "this looks strange" and "I can actually prove this". But from the overall perspective, it's a mess.

So at this point, I would just keep all those emails and screenshots. Especially the different statements about the license and ADR. If there is a reasonable explanation, hopefully someone will finally give it to you.

And honestly, I am now quite curious myself about what Anjouan will say if they finally respond. Because this is turning into a rather brutal user case.

I would say hang in there, but I have no idea where that specific "there" exactly is at this point.