Sports Betting - General Discussions
Discussions about the beautiful world of sports betting especially all issues relating to sportsbook bonuses. Post your opinions and find everything about latest bonuses, promotions, tournaments, freerolls…
Subforums
-
- 274
- posts
-
- 42
- posts
-
- 12
- posts
-
- 2
- posts
-
- 93
- posts
161 topics in this forum
-
- 0 replies
- 899 views
-
- 1 reply
- 890 views
-
- 0 replies
- 816 views
-
- 1 reply
- 796 views
-
- 4 replies
- 792 views
-
- 0 replies
- 749 views
-
- 2 replies
- 739 views
-
- 0 replies
- 610 views
-
- 1 reply
- 380 views
-
- 0 replies
- 289 views
-
- 7 replies
- 185 views
-
Recently Browsing
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
-
-
By abdellahnezzari.cachyou · Posted
Dear Curacao eGaming Authority and 1xBet Senior Management, I am writing to formally notify you that I am currently gathering reports from more than 1,000 players who claim to have been negatively affected by 1xBet’s handling of account restrictions, verification procedures, delayed responses, and unresolved complaints. This is no longer an isolated individual case. The number of affected players and the similarity of their experiences raise serious concerns about a potentially systematic problem in the way player complaints, security reviews, and verification procedures are being handled. We fully recognize and respect the need for KYC, identity verification, security checks, and anti-fraud procedures. Our objection is not to legitimate security measures. Our concern is with unreasonable delays, repeated requests, lack of meaningful explanations, and the failure to resolve cases within a reasonable and transparent timeframe. It is particularly concerning when a customer can remain under verification or restriction for one or even two months without a meaningful resolution. Such prolonged delays can place considerable pressure on customers and may effectively discourage them from continuing to pursue legitimate claims or recovering funds to which they are entitled. Furthermore, 1xBet’s own stated procedures refer to a 72-hour timeframe for certain verification/security procedures. If the operator establishes a timeframe for its own procedures, it should also be expected to apply those procedures consistently and transparently. A situation in which customers are required to comply with strict deadlines while the operator itself repeatedly exceeds its own stated timeframe without adequate explanation deserves regulatory scrutiny. There are also serious shortcomings in the customer-support process. For example, when documents are submitted to a designated Security or Verification department, customers may not even receive an automated confirmation that the documents have been successfully received, nor a clear ticket/reference number allowing them to track the status of their case. We are in 2026. A modern licensed operator should have a transparent case-management and communication system that allows customers to know whether their documents were received, whether their case is being reviewed, and what stage the process has reached. For these reasons, I am currently working to organize the affected players and compile their individual cases, evidence, account histories, and communications into a collective complaint to the relevant licensing and regulatory authority. The purpose of this initiative is not to oppose legitimate security measures or to damage the reputation of the operator. It is intended to protect the dignity and legitimate rights of players and customers and to request proper regulatory oversight where procedures appear to become excessive, disproportionate, or unnecessarily prolonged. We respectfully request that the Authority examine whether the scale and similarity of these complaints indicate a broader compliance issue and, where appropriate, apply the relevant regulatory mechanisms and enforcement procedures. We are prepared to provide individual case references, correspondence, screenshots, verification records, and other supporting evidence from affected players where required. This matter is being pursued collectively because we believe that a problem affecting potentially thousands of customers should not be treated as thousands of unrelated individual incidents. We respectfully request that this notice be recorded and attached to the relevant regulatory complaint. Sincerely, Player ID: 948212133 Curacao Case Reference: #2026090933000125 -
By lucks_maximus · Posted
The very first?! That's wild. I would've thought Shady Lady with their highly volatile slots would've won something on one of the past multiplier contests, but they do seem to be not as big a provider. -
The 1000x vs another multi cuts so deep to see it leave behind during a showdown 😨
-
