Android Phone

iPad

iPhone

Android Tablet

Windows

Bitcoin

Canadian Dollar

Brazilian Real

Japanese Yen

Litecoin

Ethereum

DogeCoin

Bitcoin Cash

Tether

3 Oaks Gaming

AvatarUX

Bally Wulff

Belatra Games

BGAMING

Big Time Gaming

Blueprint Gaming

Booming Games

Elk Studios

Endorphina

Evolution Gaming

Fantasma Games

GameArt

Games Global

Golden Hero

Hacksaw Gaming

Jade Rabbit Studio

Kalamba Games

NetEnt

Nolimit City

OneTouch

Play'n Go

Playson

Popiplay

Pragmatic Play

Print Studios

Push Gaming

QuickSpin

Red Tiger Gaming

Relax Gaming

Skywind

Spinomenal

Stake Originals

Thunderkick

TrueLab Games

Wazdan

Curacao

Stake Casino

TRON

Ripple

Dogecoin

BitcoinCash

Binance

USD Coin

ApeCoin

BUSD

Chainlink

Sandbox

SHIBA

Uniswap

MATIC

Much Better

TigerPay

Chat

Email

I'd like to add more proof to the email just so u can see how much they are doing.
every reply they make they only put themselves deeper.

Hi Nicolybarte1999 - welcome to CasinoReviews.com!

Please read our Complaint Guidance and our Complaints FAQ to ensure that you fully understand how our complaint management process functions.

Unfortunately there is nothing we can help you further with on this issue. Any operator has a moral obligation to exclude accounts when threats of self-harm are present whether you intended these to be legitimate is not something that the operator can not interpret, they have to view them as credible. In regards to opening a second account, that goes against terms and conditions and, again, it is within the operator's rights to exclude you from their site and can also choose to keep you barred. These decisions are the operator's alone and there is nowhere where we can intervene.

Sorry we couldn't help further.

CasinoReviews.com Complaints Team

**Hi CasinoReviews Complaints Team,**

Thank you for your reply and the links to your guidance and FAQ. I’ve reviewed both thoroughly, and I do appreciate your role in trying to mediate fairly. However, I believe there is a crucial misunderstanding of the core issue in my case, and I hope you'll allow me to clarify.

This is **not simply a matter of self-exclusion or multiple accounts** — if it were, I wouldn’t be pursuing it this far. The root of my complaint lies in how **Stake.com mishandled my original account** and used **contradictory actions and selective enforcement of their policies** to avoid paying out bonuses I was rightfully entitled to.

Here are the most important facts:

### 1. **There Was No Formal Self-Exclusion**

Stake claims they placed my account under restriction due to a message they _interpreted_ as a self-exclusion or concern for self-harm. But:

- This message was retracted quickly.
- There was **no formal self-exclusion request**, nor any proper exclusion process initiated.
- Instead of immediately disabling my account, **they placed it into withdrawal-only mode** — but **did not notify me or confirm a proper exclusion**, which is required in responsible gambling procedures.

So, if they _truly_ believed I was a danger to myself, why did they continue to allow my participation in promotions **(as shown by my Race payout on Sept 8, 2022)**? This proves they did **not treat it as a serious exclusion**, until much later — **conveniently after my bonuses expired**.

### 2. **The Second Account Was Made to Expose Injustice**

I did not open another account to bypass self-exclusion — I created it **because Stake unjustly disabled my original account without informing me**, and I needed a way to gather proof and try to resolve the issue through support. Surprisingly, on that second account, I was allowed to deposit, wager, receive bonuses, and fully participate without restriction — until **I disclosed the existence of that second account myself**.

If this were really about "protecting me" or "enforcing policy," they would have prevented the second account from being used from the start. **Instead, they allowed over $1 million in wagering** on it before suddenly shutting it down **only after I voluntarily came forward.** That’s selective enforcement — and that's the contradiction at the heart of my complaint.

### 3. **This Is About Accountability, Not a Bonus**

I’m not just upset about missing bonuses. This is about how Stake **used a vague, unjustified restriction on my original account to block me from rewards**, but **failed to follow their own Terms of Service consistently across accounts.** They treated one account with extreme measures and the others with total leniency — until I exposed it.

So again, I respectfully disagree with your conclusion that “there is nothing we can help you with.” If Stake can **punish me** for having multiple accounts, but **benefit from letting me wager** on them first, and use **a one-sided interpretation of a retracted message** to bar my original account while letting me play on others, then **there is clearly a breach of both fairness and internal consistency.**

I’m not asking for you to overrule the operator — I’m asking you to look at the full timeline and the double standards being applied. This is **why players file complaints — to expose these exact types of bad practices**.

Thank you for your time, and I hope you will take a second look at the substance of this case.

**Best regards,**
▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇
▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇
Stake Username: ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇

Hi Nocolybarte1999,

Please refer to our previous response. This is not a matter we would intervene in.

CasinoReviews.com Complaints Team

Found for the Operator - This player has opened multiple accounts and threatened to self-harm. Stake are both right and within their rights to restrict the player's access to their services.

Dear CasinoReviews,

I am writing to file a formal complaint against Stake.com regarding the handling of my account, originally registered under ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ / ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇. My account was unjustly placed in withdrawal-only mode and excluded from bonuses despite my long-term loyalty, significant wagering activity, and respectful attempts to resolve the issue over the past three years. This complaint aims to highlight the inconsistencies in Stake's actions and their failure to provide transparent and fair treatment.

1. Unjust Account Restriction Despite Clear Attempts to Rectify
My account was placed in withdrawal-only mode on August 26, 2022, after a conversation with support in which I made exaggerated, non-serious comments while emotionally distressed and intoxicated. Within hours, I apologized, clarified my state of mind, and explained that the comments were not to be taken literally. Despite this, my account was permanently restricted with no clear written warning and no opportunity for review or appeal.

To highlight the inconsistency of Stake's actions: I later created another account, which Stake permitted to operate, and wagered over $1 million more on that account. I was also able to claim monthly and weekly bonuses consistently for several months afterward. If I was truly banned or ineligible due to self-exclusion, why was I allowed to wager and claim bonuses without any issues on the second account? even after they put it on withdrawal mode , why didnt they disable it aswell like the first one?
Moreover, my 2nd  account, which was put in withdrawal-only mode after I disclosed that the second account was mine, continued to function for several months, allowing me to withdraw funds from the bonuses. This raises questions about the actual basis for the restriction and why it was inconsistently applied.

2. Lack of Transparency and Misapplication of Terms
▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ claims that the restriction and removal of bonus eligibility were based on "self-exclusion" and "concerning statements." However, nowhere in their Terms of Service does it explicitly state that a one-time comment—especially one that was immediately followed by a retraction and apology—warrants lifetime removal from all benefits and promotional eligibility. The Terms of Service do not support such an action.

Furthermore, Stake failed to provide an adequate warning or a transparent procedure for resolving this matter. The provided reference to the Terms of Service does not explain the restrictive measures in clear terms or state that such a behavior, particularly a momentary lapse, justifies the permanent and disproportionate punishment of restricting an account.

3. Missed Bonus Compensation and Wagering Discrimination
As a high-volume user, I wagered over $1.1 million before my account was restricted. During that time, I missed multiple weekly and monthly bonuses that I was rightfully entitled to based on Stake's advertised VIP structure and promotions. These bonuses could have reasonably amounted to $10,000 to $20,000 USD or more, all of which were lost due to the premature and inconsistent restriction of my account.

Moreover, the fact that I was allowed to continue operating under a different account and receive bonuses further illustrates the arbitrariness and discriminatory nature of the actions taken by Stake. If I was ineligible or self-excluded, as claimed, why was I allowed to participate and receive benefits through another account without any repercussions?

4. Failure to Provide Adequate Resolution and Discriminatory Practices
The actions of Stake.com, including the arbitrary restrictions placed on my account and their failure to compensate me for lost bonuses, demonstrate a lack of consideration for fairness and equal treatment. If the company’s self-exclusion policies and account restrictions are to be enforced, they must be applied consistently and transparently to all users, without exceptions or bias. In my case, the lack of clear communication, the inconsistent enforcement of terms, and the failure to provide fair compensation have left me with no choice but to escalate this issue.

Requested Resolution
I respectfully request the following actions:

A thorough investigation into Stake.com’s actions, particularly their handling of my account restrictions, bonus denials, and failure to properly apply their Terms of Service.

An explanation from Stake.com regarding why one account was permanently restricted while another, identical account, was allowed to operate, wager, and receive bonuses without issue.

Compensation or reconciliation for the missed bonuses I would have earned, which could reasonably total between $10,000 and $20,000 USD, due to Stake’s mishandling of my account.

A review of Stake’s handling of self-exclusion procedures and a call for better transparency and adherence to clear policies in the future, ensuring that such situations are handled fairly and consistently for all users.

I am prepared to provide supporting screenshots, correspondence logs, and any other necessary documentation to substantiate my claims. I trust that you will investigate this matter thoroughly and take the necessary steps to ensure Stake.com complies with licensing regulations and treats players fairly.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your prompt and thorough investigation into the issue.

Sincerely,
▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇
▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇
▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇
Stake Username: ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇

I have also attached below the current conversation from stake for better clarity. But I have messaged them countless times over the span of 3 years. and has only given me the same generic replies.

Stake Casino - Unjust Account Restrictions and Denial of Bonuses

To submit an online gambling complaint, register a new account or log in.

Create account

Log in

Got a complaint about a gambling site?

Casino Review Site Logo

Log out

Account

Title

Complaint Details

Posted By

Disputed amount

Date raised

Date closed

Player’s Complaint

To protect the privacy of our users, all personally identifiable information has been redacted. If you see anything we've missed contact us at complaints@casinoreviews.com.

Player's Complaint

Player Complaint Responses

Complaint Title

This complaint may have been archived. If you are looking for information about your complaint, please contact us at complaints@casinoreviews.com