Contact Us
When to contact the operator
Before the editorial team can act on a message, account-specific issues have to be routed correctly. Login failures, blocked withdrawals, declined deposits, verification requests, bonus disputes and anything tied to a player’s personal profile fall outside the editorial remit. Those matters sit with Big dollar’s own support staff, who hold the account records and the payment systems. The editorial team cannot view a player’s balance, adjust a wagering state or reverse a transaction, and any attempt to do so would only delay the resolution.
For the reader, the practical effect is simple: send password resets, payment problems and identity checks directly to the operator. Messages about those topics sent through this page will be forwarded only in the sense that they will be noted — they will not be actioned here. The operator’s support channels are the only route that can change an account state.
Questions the editorial team answers
What this page does handle is the review itself. Queries about how a bonus was assessed, why a particular game was listed with a given volatility rating, how the wagering requirement was calculated or whether a stated payout time matches the current terms all belong here. If the published review contains a figure that no longer matches what the operator displays, that is a correction request, and it takes priority over general commentary.
- Corrections to facts already published on this site, including changed bonus terms, altered RTP values or retired game titles
- Requests to update information after a brand rebrand or a change in ownership
- Questions about how a rating or a verdict was reached
- Reports that a page still shows outdated conditions after the operator has changed them
Corrections are checked against the operator’s own published terms before any edit is made. A reported discrepancy is not published as fact until it is verified against a primary source, which in most cases is the operator’s own terms page or game information screen. Where verification is not possible, the review is left unchanged rather than amended on unconfirmed reports.
How outdated information is handled
When a correction arrives, the editorial team compares the reported detail with the current operator documentation. If the two conflict, the newer operator statement wins, and the review is amended accordingly. If the operator’s own pages are inconsistent — for instance, a bonus page differing from the general terms — the review notes the discrepancy instead of picking one side.
Readers who spot a stale figure should expect the review to be updated only after that verification step. No change is made on the strength of a single player report alone, and no change is ever made retroactively to a past verdict. The correction applies to the live page going forward, not to how a bonus was assessed at an earlier date.
What stays outside this page
Legal demands, regulator complaints and requests to mediate between a player and the operator are not part of the editorial function. A player who believes a grievance has not been resolved by the operator should pursue the operator’s own complaints procedure or the relevant authority in their province. This page cannot compel the operator to act, and any message framed as a demand for intervention will be returned to the sender with a pointer toward the proper channel.
Responsible-gambling concerns follow the same boundary. Requests for self-exclusion, deposit limits or time-out periods must go to Big dollar directly, because only the operator can apply those restrictions to an account. The editorial team will not hold personal details related to such matters, and any such information sent here should be redirected to the operator without delay. Players who need support beyond what the operator provides are better served by provincial help lines than by a review site.