Yay Casino

VISA

Hi jh2js2jk - welcome back to Casino Reviews!

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

Just as a disclaimer - we are not, and do not form part of the Competition Bureau. We are an independent, third-party ADR service.

Sadly there is nothing we can do to assist you in this matter. Firstly, if there was an error in the payout of the game you played, you have stopped playing when you became aware of the error. Continuing to play when you know the game is not paying out correctly fails to provide the operator the chance to address the issue before gameplay continues.

Next, you've chosen to play with a sweepstakes/social casino. These businesses have been set up explicitly to exploit illegal technicality excluding them from gambling regulations. Where you choose to play with this model of business, the regulatory standards relating to the integrity of game operations are non-existent.

The fact that the operator has provided you with free SC coins does not meet the legal standards for bribery. It is quite normal for a business when dealing with an unhappy customer to offer some sort of concessionary gestures, which you also asked for in your first email to the operator.

All we can suggest is in the future, if you're looking to play with a gambling operator, you should ensure they are fully licensed in your state.

Sorry we cannot be of further assistance.

CasinoReviews.com Complaints Team

Hello,



Thank you for your response. However, several of the statements in your message do not accurately reflect what occurred, and I want to clarify the timeline so that my actions are not mischaracterized.



When the first three payout discrepancies occurred—all within minutes of each other and all on the same game—I immediately stopped playing that game, reported the issue, and requested that the operator credit the winnings I was owed. They refused and claimed there were “no irregularities,” despite providing no supporting evidence.



It was only after the operator dismissed my initial complaint that the fourth payout failure occurred—this time on a completely different game. At that point, I realized this was not an isolated malfunction but a broader integrity issue with the platform’s payout system.



I also requested that my account be closed. The operator responded to that same message thread, so they clearly saw the request. Despite this, they did not close the account. Instead, the following day they added additional free SC to my account. Adding credits after a customer reports payout discrepancies and requests account closure is not only inappropriate, but under many consumer-protection standards can be viewed as an attempt to discourage or influence a complainant—which is the very definition of improper inducement.



I appreciate your time, but I do not accept being made to feel as though I acted improperly by reporting repeated payout errors, stopping gameplay, requesting compensation, and requesting account closure. I followed the appropriate steps; the operator did not.



▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇

Hi jh2js2jk,

We're not suggesting you've acted improperly, but we are saying:

i) That offering a gratuity to a disgruntled customer is nothing unusual in any service sector;

ii) That the access status of your account does not actually make any difference to your situation. If you didn't want to play further, you did not have to go back into your account;

iii) That the unregulated nature of the operator you've chosen to play with means that this is not a situation we can assist you with.

Sorry we cannot be of further help.

CasinoReviews.com Complaints Team

Hello,


I understand that offering gratuity to disgruntled customers is common. What I have a problem with is when a customer asks multiple times to have their account closed, and instead of honoring an account closure request, they offer more gratuity even though I declined 3 previous attempts to add gratuity. I also stopped making deposits once I realized it was not just the one game that was malfunctioning.



On that note, lessened learned about not playing on unregulated sites from now on.

Where you choose to play with an unregulated gambling operator, the games that you engage with will not have been tested or meet the rigorous standards required of licensed operators.

**C³ompany Information:** Social Gaming LLC operates "Yay Casino," an online sweepstakes casino, from Ontario, Canada. The company targets consumers in the United States and Canada through its website and mobile application.
**Nature of Complaint**: I am filing this complaint regarding systematic false and misleading representations made by Social Gaming LLC in violation of Canada's Competition Act., and
Violation of the Ontario Consumer Protection Act, 2002 Section 14 (Unfair Practices).  The company falsely advertises that its games operate according to published rules and that legitimate winnings will be credited to players' accounts. When confronted with evidence of these false representations, the company attempted to bribe me into silence by repeatedly offering unsolicited credits, and even ignored my explicit requests to close my account while continuing to add more credits in what appears to be a deliberate attempt to suppress my complaint and avoid accountability.
**The False Representations**: Social Gaming LLC publishes detailed game rules for its "Hold and Win" bonus games. These published rules explicitly state that when six or more qualifying symbols (diamonds or coins) appear on the reels, a bonus round automatically triggers. The rules promise that players will receive the combined cash values displayed on those symbols, plus three additional respins where more symbols can land and accumulate for larger payouts. I relied on these published rules when making deposits to my account, believing the company would honor its advertised terms.
Evidence of Systematic Deception: Between November 8-11, 2025, I made eighty-two deposits totaling $1,908.89 USD (approximately $2,650 CAD) to Yay Casino based on the company's representations that games operate fairly according to published rules. On November 10, 2025, I documented four separate instances within a thirteen-hour period where the published triggering conditions were met exactly as described in the rules, but the promised bonus rounds never activated and no winnings were credited to my account. At 10:49 AM, six or more diamond symbols appeared on Firebolt Multi 7s showing a value of $26.80 - no bonus triggered. At 10:58 AM, six or more diamond symbols appeared again showing $18.20 - no bonus triggered. At 11:01 AM, it happened a third time with diamond symbols showing $21.15 - again, no bonus triggered. Finally, at 11:33 PM that same day, six or more coin symbols appeared on Gold Mint 7s showing $31.25 - and once again, no bonus triggered. I have screenshots documenting each of these incidents, proving that the qualifying conditions were met but the company failed to deliver what its published rules promised.
The fact that four separate failures occurred within thirteen hours on a single day demonstrates this was not an isolated technical glitch or random error. This is a systematic pattern of the company advertising one thing while delivering another. These four documented incidents represent only the instances where I was able to capture screenshots in real-time while actively playing. I experienced additional qualifying conditions that failed to trigger throughout my eighty-two transactions, but could not document every occurrence while trying to play the games.
Company's Deceptive Response: On November 11, 2025, I submitted a formal written complaint to Social Gaming LLC regarding the three morning incidents (10:49 AM, 10:58 AM, and 11:01 AM). I specifically requested supporting documentation including transaction IDs, ledger evidence showing when and whether any winnings were actually credited, and any records that would prove their games operated as advertised. The company responded claiming they had "investigated" and found "no irregularities," asserting that winnings were added to my account at 11:00 AM on November 10. However, despite my multiple requests, the company provided absolutely zero documentation to support this claim - no transaction IDs, no ledger entries, no server logs, nothing. When a company claims to have investigated but refuses to provide any documentation whatsoever, it suggests the investigation never occurred and the response was simply an attempt to dismiss a legitimate complaint.
After I complained about the first three incidents, I discovered the fourth failed bonus trigger that occurred at 11:33 PM on November 10, further proving this was not an isolated error but a systematic problem with how the company operates its games.
Attempted Bribery and Suppression of **Complaints**: After I posted a factual review on Trustpilot describing these documented payout discrepancies, Social Gaming LLC's conduct became even more concerning and revealed what appears to be a deliberate strategy to silence consumer complaints through bribery. The company immediately flagged my truthful Trustpilot review as "defamatory" in an attempt to have it removed and suppress my ability to warn other consumers. Then, rather than provide the documentation I had repeatedly requested or address the legitimate issues I raised, the company began depositing unsolicited credits into my account without my consent or approval.
First, they added seventy Sweeps Coins (SC) to my account. Then they added another eighty SC. Then sixty more SC. Then another eighty SC. In total, Social Gaming LLC deposited 290 SC (worth $290 USD or approximately $402 CAD) into my account as unsolicited credits. I never requested these credits, I never agreed to accept them, and I explicitly rejected them. The timing and amount of these credits are highly suspicious and appear calculated to silence my complaint. Why would a company offer $290 worth of credits to resolve what they claimed was a non-existent problem? The answer is obvious: they knew the actual damages were much higher than the minimum $97.40 I could document, and they were trying to buy my silence before I could expose the full extent of their deceptive practices.
**Ignoring Account Closure Requests** - Continuing the Bribery: What happened next is even more egregious and demonstrates the company's deliberate intent to keep me trapped in their system while continuing attempts to bribe me into silence. On November 13, 2025, after rejecting the unsolicited credits, I formally requested that Social Gaming LLC close my account. They refused. I requested account closure a second time on November 13, explicitly stating I wanted my account closed and no further interaction with the company. They refused again. Instead of honoring my clear and unambiguous requests to close my account and end our business relationship, Social Gaming LLC added yet another eighty SC to my account - bringing the total unsolicited bribe money to 290 SC (worth approximately $290 USD).
This conduct is deeply concerning. When a consumer explicitly requests account closure - not once but twice - and a company not only refuses but continues depositing money into the account, it reveals a company that is not operating in good faith. The company was trying to keep me engaged with their platform and create the appearance that I had accepted their bribe money and therefore could not continue complaining about their deceptive practices. They wanted to be able to claim "we gave her $290 in credits and she used them, so clearly there was no problem." However, I used absolutely none of the 290 SC (or the additional 80 SC), and I continued to demand account closure and a full refund.
Only after my third request to close my account, and after I informed the company that refusing to close my account violated my consumer rights, did Social Gaming LLC finally close my account. The fact that it took three explicit requests and a warning about legal violations before they would allow me to leave their platform demonstrates that this company's business model depends on trapping consumers and preventing them from escaping even when they discover the deception.
Pattern Affecting Multiple Consumers: My experience is not isolated. Other consumers have posted reviews on Trustpilot reporting identical problems: qualifying wins not credited according to published rules, vague company responses with no documentation provided, and attempts to silence complaints rather than address legitimate concerns. This demonstrates a systematic pattern of false representations affecting consumers across multiple jurisdictions. When multiple independent consumers report the same specific problems - games not operating according to published rules, missing winnings, refusal to provide documentation, attempts to suppress complaints - it proves this is not about individual misunderstandings or technical glitches. This is about a company's deliberate business model built on deception.
The Larger Deceptive Scheme: Social Gaming LLC's deceptive practices extend beyond the false game representations. The company's Terms of Service contain an arbitration clause requiring consumers to arbitrate disputes in Toronto, Ontario, at a cost of $7,500 CAD plus thirteen percent HST (total: $8,475 CAD per party) for "expedited" arbitration, or $15,000-$30,000 CAD per party for standard commercial arbitration. For a consumer who has been defrauded of $1,908.89 USD, being required to pay $8,475-$30,000 CAD to seek recourse makes justice economically impossible. This arbitration clause is not designed to resolve disputes - it is designed to immunize the company from accountability by making it financially impossible for defrauded consumers to pursue their claims.

When you combine the false game representations with the prohibitively expensive arbitration clause, the pattern of refusing to provide documentation, the attempts to bribe consumers into silence, and the refusal to close accounts when requested, the overall picture becomes clear: Social Gaming LLC has designed a comprehensive system to deceive consumers, take their money through rigged games, and prevent any realistic path to accountability. The repeated unsolicited credits and refusal to honor account closure requests are particularly troubling because they demonstrate the company's consciousness of guilt and its willingness to engage in what appears to be bribery to avoid taking responsibility for systematic deceptive practices.
**Impact on Consumers:** This deceptive business model causes significant consumer harm across international borders. Consumers like myself make deposits based on false promises that games operate according to published rules. When those rules are systematically violated and legitimate winnings are not credited, consumers lose their deposits without receiving the services that were advertised. When consumers complain, they are met with attempts at bribery rather than honest accounting. When consumers try to leave, the company refuses to let them go. And when consumers seek recourse through arbitration, they face costs that are hundreds of percent higher than their claims, making justice impossible. This business model preys on consumers while using multiple layers of deception and financial barriers to avoid accountability.
**Relief Requested**: I respectfully request that the Competition Bureau investigate Social Gaming LLC's deceptive marketing practices and determine whether the company's conduct violates the Competition Act, specifically Section 52 (false or misleading representations) and Section 74.01 (deceptive marketing practices). I request that the Bureau consider the systematic nature of these violations, the pattern of similar complaints from other consumers, the company's attempts to bribe consumers into silence through unsolicited credits, the refusal to honor account closure requests, and the use of prohibitively expensive arbitration clauses to shield the company from accountability.

Yay Casino - False and Misleading Representations, Deceptive Marketing Practices

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

This link is no longer valid

Dynamic Single Complaint 

Default

IGT DE

All British Casino UK

Playtech ZA

Bank Transfer CA

Online Casinos UK

Cookie Policy DE

PayPal

Neteller UK

Spin Casino

ecoPayz IE

King Billy Casino CA

Free Spins IN

Casinos en vivo PE

Terms of Use DE

Mirax Casino CA

Oasis Poker

Hellspin Casino NZ

Roulette ZA

Rizk Casino IE

Bonos de Casino

ecoPayz UK

Live Casinos AT

IGT NZ

Yabby Casino IE

Casinos Online CL

Condiciones de uso MX

Dave Ellefson - Founding member of Megadeth

African Grand ZA

GrandWin Casino

Mirax 

Bank Transfer ZA

Guts Casino CA

Ken Smith Blackjack Tournament Expert

Diamond7 Casino 

Casino Games IN

Visa CA

bCasino.co.uk – A UK licensed operator with ties to the black market?

New Casinos IN

21Prive Casino

Queen Vegas NZ

All Complaints

Visa ZA

King Billy Casino

Skrill CA

PayPal NZ

500 Deposit NZ

32Red Casino

Paysafecard DE

Responsible Gambling IN

Casino War

21Red Casino

Game Providers UK

Qbet Casino

ecoPayz CH

Quickfire

Zahlungsmethoden CH

Ruleta CO

Betway Casino NZ

888 Casino

PayPal IE

Arctic Casino NZ

JackpotCity Casino Ontario

Responsible Gambling UK

Reclamaciones PE

Aristocrat

Microgaming DE

888 Casino CA

Grosvenor Casino

100 Deposit NZ

Online Casinos IE

Mirax NZ

Starda Casino IN

Casumo Casino Ontario

Bank Transfer IN

Wazamba Casino CA

Betsson CO

Baccarat CA

Vegas Crest NZ

Red Stag Casino IE

Live Casinos NZ

Casumo Casino NZ

KingdomAce Casino

Mobile Casinos

CasinoLuck

Dinero real

Blackjack MX

Playtech DE

Visa IN

SlotsMagic Casino NZ

Bizzo Casino CL

Craps UK

Boku ZA

WSM Casino CA

888 Casino Ontario

Slots UK

Cobra Casino NZ

JackpotCity Casino IE

Cobber Casino AT

Política de privacidad MX

Whistleblowing Policy

Baccarat IE

Casino4u AT

Juegos de Casino CO

Casino Classic NZ

Casino Bonus AT

VIP Casinos CH

Free Spins for Adding Card UK

Contacta con nosotros CL

Ultra Casino NZ

Royal Panda Casino

Bally ZA

Wildz Casino Ontario

Neue Casinos DE

Bitcoin AT

Best Payout casinos NZ

Dinero real MX

Jackpot Village Casino

Villento Casino

Wazamba Casino

Zaza Casino

Interac 

Playtech CA

Fresh Casino

Casino Games ZA

Spielautomaten CH

Fresh Casino IN

Quickfire NZ

Izzi Casino CA

LuckyWins NZ

Beste Auszahlungen in Casinos DE

Euro Palace Casino NZ

Ladbrokes Casino

Spielautomaten AT

Payment Methods

IGT IN

Neteller

SpinBetter Casino NZ

Bally CH

Aristocrat UK

Bank Transfer

New Casinos UK

Locowin Casino CA

Guides

Roulette CH

Fresh Casino PE

PlayNGo DE

Nuevos casinos PE

WinsRoyal Casino NZ

VIP Casinos

New Casinos IE

CasinoVibes Casino CA

Real Money ZA

Conquestador Casino CA

Bonos de Casino PE

Konami ZA

Turbico Casino

Affiliate Edge and retroactive term changes

Slots IN

NetEnt IE

Evolve Casino NZ

CasinoReviews PE

$5 Deposit Casinos NZ

King Billy Casino NZ

Barcrest ZA

Casino Bonuses IE

Miami Dice Casino

Novomatic DE

888 Casino NZ

Visa CH