Contact Us

Corrections and Updates

A reader who spots a factual error, a dead promotion, or a change in terms on a Spinyoo page should send a note through the contact form. The editorial team checks every report and verifies the claim against the operator’s own published documentation before amending the text. Where the correction involves a bonus rate, a wagering condition, or an availability restriction, the team confirms the new figure directly with the casino’s public materials rather than relying on third-party chatter.

Outdated information is treated as a priority defect, not a cosmetic issue. A stale wagering multiple or a closed payment method can mislead a player into a decision they would not otherwise make. The team therefore processes such reports ahead of general queries, and the page is updated as soon as the facts are confirmed. No correction is published on the strength of a single anonymous tip; the claim must be traceable to a verifiable source.

Editorial Scope

The team answers questions about the substance of the reviews: how a rating was reached, why a particular game appears on the list, what the RTP range means in practice, and how volatility affects a play session. Queries about the methodology behind the comparisons, the weight given to responsible-gambling features, or the reason a specific licence is mentioned in a review also fall within the editorial remit.

Matters that concern the operation of a player account sit outside that remit. A question about a pending withdrawal, a rejected deposit, a locked balance, or a verification document that has not been processed cannot be resolved here. The editorial team has no access to player accounts, no view of the casino’s payment systems, and no authority to intervene in a transaction. Directing such a query to the operator is not a deflection; it is the only path that leads to an actual resolution.

Direct Operator Contact

Account, deposit, and withdrawal problems must go to the operator’s own support channels. The reasons are practical. A casino holds the records of every transaction, every bonus credit, and every identity check; a review website holds none of that data. When a player reports a missing payout through this form, the team can only restate the operator’s published withdrawal policy and suggest the official contact route. That adds a step for the player and delays the help they need.

There is also a boundary of responsibility. The editorial team vouches for the accuracy of the review text, not for the outcome of any individual wager or cashout. If a dispute arises over a bonus that was credited and then removed, or a withdrawal that was declined, the operator is the only party that can examine the account history, apply the terms, and issue a decision. The team will not forward complaints on a player’s behalf, because doing so would create a false impression that the website can influence the operator’s internal processes.

Response and Scope Limits

Every message is read, and a substantive reply is sent wherever a question falls within the editorial brief. Where a query belongs to the operator, the reply will state that clearly and point to the correct channel. The team does not speculate about the outcome of a pending transaction, does not estimate a processing time on the operator’s behalf, and does not interpret a bonus term that is ambiguous in the casino’s own wording.

All correspondence is handled with the same care as the reviews themselves. A correction that is verified is applied; a question that is outside the brief is redirected; a complaint that concerns a third-party payment provider is referred to that provider’s support. Nothing sent through this form is ignored, and nothing is answered with a generic template when the query is specific.