Key takeaways
Nearly every casino can close your account and keep the balance. What separates them is how often they do it, and whether you get the money back
Complaints about closed accounts and seized funds run from 5.8% at 7Bit Casino to 43.6% at Betpanda. That is eight times more at one end than the other
A high share is not automatically bad. Cloudbet sits at 21% but resolves 88% of complaints, and has rejected one out of 95
Betpanda is the mix to avoid: the worst share, only 36% resolved, 14 complaints still unanswered, and no licence you can check
The usual trigger is not fraud. It is two accounts on one wifi connection, and some terms only need the casino to suspect it
Check the resolution rate before you deposit. A casino that answers complaints beats one with a better rating that does not
Almost every casino can close your account and keep the money in it. We read the terms at all 31 casinos we review and found that clause nearly everywhere. It is written loosely, and it works whenever the casino decides it does. We covered the wording in our guide to the clauses that can void your winnings.
Having the right is not the same as using it. So this piece asks a harder question. Which casinos actually do it, and do you get your money back?
Public complaint records answer both. For each casino we took two numbers. First, how many of its complaints are about a closed account or money being taken. Second, how many of its complaints get resolved. One tells you how often this comes up. The other tells you whether it goes anywhere.
12
Casinos with enough complaint history to rank fairly, meaning at least 20 on record.
19%
Middle of the pack: the share of complaints about closed accounts or seized funds.
43.6%
The worst share, at Betpanda, which resolves only 36% of complaints.
5.8%
The best share, at 7Bit Casino, which resolves 96% of complaints.
A quick word on the ranking. We only rank casinos with at least 20 complaints on record. One complaint against a casino with four on file would show up as a 25% pattern. That says nothing about the casino and everything about small numbers. Several operators are left out for that reason.
What closure actually means
Two different things happen, and they are worth keeping apart.
Closing the account stops you playing. Annoying, but you usually get your balance paid out.
Confiscation is the one that costs you. The account is frozen, the balance is treated as void, and the money does not come back. In the terms this is usually one sentence buried in a long paragraph about banned behaviour.
Shuffle
If you attempt to open more than one Shuffle Account, any and all such accounts may be blocked, suspended or closed, and any sums credited to those accounts will be frozen and may be deducted.
Stake
Multiple accounts will be blocked/frozen.
Betpanda
Prohibited: Multi-accounting, Collusion, Bonus abuse, Arbitrage, Game manipulation. May result in disqualification and XP/reward clawback.
FortuneJack
Prohibited: collusion, fraud, multiple accounts, low-risk gameplay, bot use, card counting, arbitrage, AI tools.
Look at the FortuneJack list again. Low-risk gameplay is on it, next to fraud and bots. Betting carefully sits in the same sentence as cheating. That is how loosely these rules are drawn.
How often it happens
Here is the share of each casino's complaints that involve a closed account or seized funds. Worst first.
The gap runs from 5.8% to 43.6%. That is eight times more at one end than the other. Same kind of clause in everyone's terms, very different behaviour in practice.
At the good end, 7Bit Casino and Shuffle both keep closures under 7% of complaints. 7Bit also resolves 96% of everything filed against it. That is the best record here on both counts.
The number that matters more
A high share on its own is not damning. What matters is what happens next.
Cloudbet shows this best. It is the highest scoring casino we review. Closures and seized funds make up 21% of its complaints, one of the higher shares on the list. But it resolves 88% of them, and out of 95 complaints, exactly one was rejected. Disputes happen there and they get sorted.
Betpanda is the opposite. It has 22 complaints. Eight are resolved, none have been rejected, and 14 are still sitting open. Nothing is being turned down. Nothing is being answered either. Betpanda also publishes no licence we can check, so there is no regulator to take it to.
At Betpanda, 14 of 22 complaints are still open and none have been rejected. There is no licence you could escalate to either.
Two more are worth pulling out. Stake has a middling 14.3% share, but it rejected 23 of its 74 complaints. That is the highest refusal count here. BitStarz rejected 9 of 26. A rejection is not automatically wrong. But a low share with a low resolution rate is a different risk from a high share that gets cleared up.
| Casino | Closure share of complaints | Complaints resolved | What that mix means |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7Bit Casino | 5.8% | 96% | Best record here on both numbers |
| MyStake | 7.1% | 89% | Complaints are mostly about withdrawals, not closures |
| Shuffle | 6.2% | 81% | Strict rules on multiple accounts, rarely a complaint driver |
| Jack.com | 16.9% | 94% | Answers every review it gets |
| Cloudbet | 21% | 88% | One rejection in 95 complaints |
| Sportsbet.io | 20.8% | 88% | Disputes get answered |
| FortuneJack | 22.6% | 86% | Very broad list of banned behaviour, but a good resolution record |
| King Billy | 23% | 83% | Resolved more often than not |
| BC.Game | 24.9% | 76% | Biggest complaint volume here, 36 of 147 rejected |
The thing that catches ordinary players
Hardly any of this is about fraud. The rule that causes real complaints is the one about two accounts on one internet connection.
Everyone on the same wifi shares an IP address. So a partner, a brother or a flatmate with their own account at the same casino looks, from the outside, exactly like one person with two accounts.
- You sign up, deposit, and take the welcome bonus. Everything is above board.
- Your flatmate already has an account at the same casino. You did not know, and nobody asked.
- Both accounts show the same IP address, because you share one internet connection.
- The casino flags the pair as one person with two accounts.
- Under the terms, bonus winnings can be removed on suspicion alone. No proof is needed.
- You find out when a withdrawal is refused, and the only place to appeal is the casino itself.
You do not have to do anything wrong. You just need a housemate who likes the same casino.
Jack.com says it plainly: "If Player is suspected of creating multiple accounts or using the same IP address, all winnings from bonuses will be removed." Note the word suspected. Not proven.
MyStake has a different one worth knowing. Cancel a bonus through live chat and "total bonus, winnings, and all bets placed between activation and cancellation are deducted." Back out of a bonus and it unwinds the bets you already made.
Five ways to stay out of this
- One account per person, one household per casino. If someone you live with plays at the same site, pick a different one.
- Never share a login. Letting a friend have a spin on your account is the classic trigger.
- Check the resolution rate, not just the score. A casino that answers complaints beats one with a slightly better rating that does not. We list it in every review, and you can compare them in our full review list.
- Pick a casino with a licence you can check. No licence means no regulator to appeal to. See what a crypto casino licence really gets you.
- Withdraw often. Money you have taken out cannot be frozen. Our withdrawal friction index shows which casinos make that easy.
One more signal is worth a look. Whether a casino replies to public reviews at all tracks closely with whether it resolves disputes. We measured that in how often these casinos answer their reviewers.
Do not ask whether a casino can close your account. Ask what happens to the balance when it does.
Gambling should stay fun. If it stops being fun, free and confidential support is available across Canada. You can also read how our scoring works.
Frequently asked questions
Can a casino really keep my money if it closes my account?
The terms at most casinos allow it. Closing an account usually just stops you playing, and your balance is paid out. Confiscation is the serious version, where the balance is frozen and treated as void. It normally sits in one sentence inside a long paragraph about banned behaviour, which is why almost nobody reads it first.
What is the most common reason accounts get closed?
Two accounts linked to one internet connection. Everyone on the same wifi shares an IP address, so a partner or flatmate with their own account at the same casino can look like one person with two. Some terms only require the casino to suspect it. They do not have to prove anything.
What is a resolution rate, and why does it beat the score?
It is the share of complaints against a casino that get resolved, rather than rejected or left open. It tells you what happens after something goes wrong, which is exactly when you need to know. In our set it runs from 36% to 96%. That gap matters far more than a few tenths of a point on a rating.
Why are only 12 casinos ranked when you review 31?
A percentage needs enough complaints behind it to mean anything. One complaint against a casino with four on record would look like a 25% pattern. That tells you about small numbers, not about the casino. We only rank casinos with at least 20 complaints on record, so several are left out.
Does a high closure share mean I should avoid a casino?
Not on its own. Read it next to the resolution rate. Cloudbet has one of the higher shares at 21%, but resolves 88% of complaints and rejected one in 95, so disputes there get sorted. The mix to worry about is a high share, a low resolution rate, and no licence you can check.
What can I do if my account is closed and my balance is held?
Raise it with the casino first and keep everything in writing. If that fails, take it to the licensing authority named in the terms, which is why a licence you can actually check matters. These casinos operate offshore, so there is no Canadian regulator to appeal to and no Canadian court involved.