What Happened
A player from Serbia says BC.Game locked their second account right after it was verified and a withdrawal was asked for. The player says the casino's own linking tool had joined it to their first account. BC.Game said the account was part of a network of 118 accounts and let the player take back only the roughly 20,000 USDC they had deposited. About 6,000 USDC in winnings stayed locked.
How It Developed
- 2026-03-11Complaint opened. The player says the new account was locked overnight and they were sent an account-recovery form with no reason given.
- BC.Game said the account was tied to 118 others run from the same setup and reopened withdrawals for the deposited money only. Both sides agree the deposits were then withdrawn.
- BC.Game later said it had approved a withdrawal of the remaining funds. The player said the winnings stayed locked; the casino then explained that only about 2 USDC of the deposits was left to take out.
- A new resolver said that if the casino linked the accounts and let play go on, fairly won money should be paid, and asked for proof. BC.Game cited shared wallets, behaviour patterns and hedging across accounts, but would not share the data.
- 2026-05-25The mediator offered a private review or a non-disclosure agreement. BC.Game stopped replying, and the case was closed.
Confiscated
The mediator found BC.Game's evidence insufficient and the confiscation unfair, but the casino kept the winnings.
What Helped
The player's strongest point was that the casino itself had linked and verified the second account. That convinced the mediator, but it could not make BC.Game pay. If a casino points to secret evidence, ask it to share that evidence privately with the mediator. If it won't, take the case to its licensing body.