BitStarz Casino - Spelarens uttag är försenat på grund av överdrivna dokumentationsförfrågningar.

Hi Casino Guru Team,

I am hoping you can help me with a very frustrating verification situation that has been ongoing for months now.

Bitstarz Casino is refusing to release my remaining deposit balance of approximately $11,347 on a net-losing account. I have submitted full KYC. They are demanding two non-standard additional documents, citing a deposit-verification clause that does not govern withdrawals.

I deposited approximately $16,000 in USDT over time. My current balance is ~$11,347. I am at a net loss and not seeking winnings — only the return of my remaining deposit funds, to the same crypto wallet that funded the deposits, per section 8.7.13 of Bitstarz's Terms. I am a resident of Austria, which is not on Bitstarz's Restricted Countries list.

**KYC submitted and accepted (sections 7.2, 8.6.3, 8.7.4):** passport, proof of address, proof of payment, bank statement, and a selfie holding my passport (the verification described in 8.6.3).

**The disputed requests.** After accepting all of the above, Bitstarz refused to process my withdrawal until I additionally provide:

1. A photo of me standing next to a street sign or identifiable location near my home.

2. A selfie holding my ID alongside a newspaper, with "Bitstarz" and today's date handwritten on the newspaper, signed underneath.

Neither item is named in Bitstarz's Terms. Neither is standard KYC under any AML framework. The street-sign photograph discloses my home location, which is excessive when verified proof of address is on file. The newspaper-with-handwritten-branding selfie has no recognised KYC function and is not used by any regulated payment service.

**Bitstarz's first justification: section 8.6.3.** The clause reads: *"We reserve the right to use additional procedures and means to verify your identity (Know Your Client) when effecting deposits into your Account. This could include (but is not limited to) a selfie with a document or form of identification."*

This clause is very clearly scoped to verification "when effecting deposits." My matter is a withdrawal. Withdrawal verification is governed by section 8.7.4 (passport, ID, utility bills, deposit-method copies — all on file). The only specific method named in 8.6.3 is a selfie with ID, already provided.

When I pointed this out, Bitstarz did not defend the citation. They pivoted.

**Bitstarz's second justification: section 7.2 "sole discretion," referencing 7.1.** Section 7.1 sets KYC's three purposes: *"i) a real person; ii) the funds deposited are of legitimate origin and belong to the casino account holder and iii) the funds released to the Player by the Casino will reach the destination payment account and person."*

All three are already satisfied: (1) passport + selfie with passport; (2) bank statement and verified deposit wallet; (3) section 8.7.13 requires withdrawal to the same wallet used for deposits. The disputed documents serve none of 7.1's three purposes. "Sole discretion" in 7.2 must be read in the context of 7.1's purpose.

**The goalpost-moving in writing.** In a subsequent reply, Bitstarz narrowed the demand: *"At this stage, we still require the outstanding street selfie. Without this document, we're unable to proceed with verification or any withdrawal."

In good faith I emailed them, said I was ready to comply, and asked for written confirmation that (1) a clear selfie at an identifiable Austrian location would be sufficient on its own (I agreed with taking a selfie infront of my street sign), and (2) the withdrawal would be processed without further documentation requests once uploaded.

Bitstarz did not answer either question. They re-pasted their original two-document demand verbatim, restoring the newspaper-with-handwritten-branding selfie they had just dropped. This is direct written evidence of the casino moving the goalposts in real time in response to good faith.

**Section 3.3** of the Terms commits Bitstarz to applying "reasonable measures to remit the funds." I am asking only for the return of my own deposited funds on a net-losing account.

I gave Bitstarz formal written notice that I would proceed to independent dispute resolution under section 14.8 of their Terms.

I am kindly asking Casino Guru to help with the release of my remaining deposit balance (~$11,347) to the originating crypto wallet, on the basis of KYC already submitted and accepted.

**Evidence available:** full email correspondence with Bitstarz (including the contradiction between the "one document" reply and the subsequent re-expansion); screenshots of submitted KYC documents, account balance, and deposit history; the relevant Terms clauses (3.3, 7.1, 7.2, 8.6.3, 8.7.4, 8.7.13, 14.8).

Thank you so much for your assistance.

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 SG98392,

Thank you for submitting your complaint. We are sorry to hear about the issues you are experiencing regarding the verification process with Bitstarz Casino.

We understand that it can be frustrating if the verification requirements were not clearly communicated in advance. However, it is common practice for casinos to carry out verification procedures at different stages. Some operators require document submission before allowing deposits, while others may permit initial withdrawals without prior verification. In most cases, verification is requested at the time of the first withdrawal. As there is no universal standard governing this process, casinos have discretion in how they manage verification, and we are not in a position to penalize them solely based on its timing.

To better understand your situation and assist you effectively, we kindly ask you to provide additional details on the following:

• The timeline of your communication with Bitstarz regarding your withdrawal request
• Any further correspondence or documentation you have exchanged with the casino that may be relevant to this issue

Your cooperation in providing this information will help us review the case and work towards a resolution.

We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to your response.

Thank you in advance.

Kind regards,

Petra

Hi Petra,

Thank you for accepting the complaint. This dispute has been ongoing since December 2025, when my withdrawal attempts were first canceled and my account was suspended pending KYC. I cooperated with Bitstarz's stated KYC process when it was triggered. The issue is that after I completed their documented KYC procedure, they introduced two additional intrusive demands that are not contained in their Terms and require me to disclose information well beyond what is necessary for identity verification.

Here is the timeline:

(Nov 29, 2025): I successfully withdrew approximately 2.1 ETH from the account. The account was not under any KYC hold at the time and the withdrawal processed without document submission.

(December 2025): I continued to deposit and play on the account through December. The balance reached its highest point in mid-late December following a significant win. I continued to play afterward and the balance subsequently dropped to its current level.

(Dec 22-23, 2025): I attempted to withdraw my balance three times in sequence: 11,342 USDT, then 11,300 USDT, then 3,500 USDT to my crypto wallet. Each attempt was canceled by Bitstarz before I made the next (these cancellations are all visible in my account history). I then discovered my account had been suspended pending submission of KYC documents.

I cooperated and submitted the full set of documents required under sections 7.2, 8.6.3, and 8.7.4 of Bitstarz's Terms: government-issued Austrian passport, proof of address, bank statement, and a selfie holding my passport (the verification specifically described in section 8.6.3).

Following acceptance of the above, Bitstarz stated they would not complete account verification or process any withdrawal until I additionally provide: (1) a photo of myself standing next to a street sign or identifiable location near my home; and (2) a selfie holding my ID alongside a newspaper, with "Bitstarz" and the current date handwritten on it, signed underneath. Neither item is named anywhere in Bitstarz's Terms. Neither is standard KYC under any AML framework. The street-sign photograph discloses my home location, which is excessive when verified proof of address is already on file. The newspaper-with-handwritten-branding selfie has no recognised KYC function.

I asked which clause authorised the additional requests. Bitstarz cited section 8.6.3, which on its plain text governs verification "when effecting deposits into your Account" and authorises "a selfie with a document or form of identification." I noted in writing that this clause is scoped to deposits, not withdrawals, and that the only specific verification method named (selfie with ID) was already on file and had been accepted.

Bitstarz then ignored this and pivoted to section 7.2's "sole discretion" provision and quoted section 7.1, which sets out KYC's three purposes (real person, legitimate funds, funds reach correct destination). I responded that all three are already satisfied: passport and selfie with passport for identity; bank statement and verified deposit wallet for fund legitimacy; section 8.7.13 for destination (withdrawal returns to the same wallet that funded deposits).

In a subsequent reply, Bitstarz dropped the newspaper selfie requirement and stated they only needed the street selfie to release the funds: *"At this stage, we still require the outstanding street selfie in order to complete the verification process. Without this document, we're unable to proceed with verification or any withdrawal."

I emailed indicating I was ready to comply in good faith and asked for written confirmation that (a) a clear selfie at an identifiable Austrian location (i.e my street) would be sufficient on its own, and (b) the withdrawal would be processed without further documentation requests once uploaded. Bitstarz did not answer either question. They re-pasted their original two-document demand verbatim, restoring the newspaper-with-handwritten-branding selfie + ID they had just dropped from the requirement.

I cooperated with Bitstarz's stated KYC process in full, and they accepted the documents I submitted. They then introduced two additional requirements that are not contained in their Terms and are not standard KYC under any AML framework I am aware of, and stated they would not complete verification or process any withdrawal without them.

After Bitstarz told me only one document was still needed, I asked for written confirmation. They responded by demanding both documents again.

I hope this helps shed more light on the situation. Please do let me know if you have any more questions.

Thank you again for your help,

S

Thank you for your reply and for providing the previous details, SG98392.

Could you please clarify the following:

• Are you still able to log in to your account?
• Did you play using bonus funds or free spins?
• Could you provide any additional supporting evidence?

You can send all relevant documents to: petra.h@casino.guru, or alternatively, you may upload your screenshots directly to the complaint thread.

Once I have all the necessary information confirmed, I will proceed with the next step of the resolution process.

Thank you again for your cooperation.

Dear SG98392

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 Samuel (samuel.s@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,

Petra

Dear SG98392,

It’s nice to e-meet you. My name is Samuel, and I’ll be assisting you with your complaint from now on.

If there are any updates or new details since your last message, please share them with me.

As part of our standard procedure, I’m also inviting a representative from BitStarz Casino to join this conversation. Their input should help us move the case forward more efficiently.

Dear BitStarz Casino,

Please provide detailed information regarding the player’s issue. In particular, we need clarification on the reasons for the delay in the player’s withdrawal due to pending verification.

Thank you for your cooperation and a timely response.

Best regards,

Samuel

Hi Samuel,

Thank you for taking on the case.

There are no new updates since my last correspondence with Petra. Full documentation, including the email history with Bitstarz, KYC materials, and account screenshots was sent to petra.h@casino.guru on May 11th.

Kind regards,

SG98392

Hi guys,

Where can we send our side of the story @Samuel?

Hello Everyone,

Dear BitStarz Casino,

please send your full statement and supporting information to samuel.s@casino.guru.

Dear SG98392,

thank you for the update. I confirm I have noted that all relevant documents were already sent to Petra. I will take this into account when reviewing the case and will come back to you once I receive the casino’s full response.

Thank you both for your cooperation.

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.