Casino Lab Review - CAD-Friendly Slots & Bonuses, But High Withdrawal Risk

Casino Lab on betlab-ca.com is the kind of brand that makes one question matter fast: is a familiar casino name still worth your trust when the market has moved on? This review breaks down what Canadian players should know about its features, bonuses, payments, safety signals, and practical limits before making any decision. One historic advantage was its broad CAD-facing appeal and recognizable slot lobby, but the real tradeoff was always how smoothly that experience held up when withdrawals or support became the priority.

Casino Features

Casino Lab was positioned as a broad online casino brand for Canadian players, with an emphasis on a simple lobby, familiar bonus-led onboarding, and support for CAD-facing deposits. The platform was most appealing to users who wanted a straightforward casino interface rather than a heavily customized VIP environment.

Publicly available data links the brand to Genesis Global Limited, which operated several gambling brands within the same group. The exact platform supplier was not clearly disclosed in the source material, so that point should be treated as unconfirmed. Without that clarity, players had less reason to feel confident about cashier speed, account controls, or back-office stability.

A casino can look solid on the surface while the underlying operating structure stays unclear. For players, the practical point is simple: a clean interface helps, but transparent ownership and dependable withdrawals matter more.

• Interface strengths:
  • Likely built for easy navigation across slots, tables, and promotional pages.
  • Appealed to both beginners and casual returning players.
  • CAD-facing branding reduced friction for Canadian users.
• Service range:
  • Casino-focused product rather than a uniquely differentiated gaming ecosystem.
  • Bonus-led acquisition was a visible part of the offer.
  • Support and verification were important account touchpoints.
• Operational limitations:
  • No clearly verified public disclosure for the software platform.
  • Group association created brand recognition, but also group-level risk exposure.
  • Historical closure now outweighs legacy usability strengths.

Players comparing legacy brands with modern alternatives may also want to review current payment methods and updated withdrawal guidance before relying on old reputation alone.

Bonuses and Promotions

Casino Lab historically leaned on standard offshore-style promotions, with welcome offers, reload deals, and free spins campaigns aimed at driving repeat deposits. For Canadians, the most relevant practical point was not the headline percentage, but the attached conditions, especially wagering, time limits, game weighting, and withdrawal restrictions.

The research indicates a 40x wagering requirement was part of the bonus structure players commonly faced. That is on the heavier side compared with transparent competitors such as PlayOJO, which built part of its appeal around zero-wagering models. If a player accepted a bonus, the process usually meant making the first deposit, claiming or auto-activating the offer, checking the bonus balance in the cashier or account area, and tracking wagering progress until funds became withdrawable. If the target was not reached on time, bonus funds and linked winnings were typically forfeited.

A realistic friction point was bonus misuse during play. Common triggers for voided winnings usually include betting above the maximum stake, playing excluded games, moving to low-contribution tables, or trying to withdraw before clearing the rollover. Casino games are entertainment, not a way to earn money, so chasing a bonus without understanding the math often increases losses rather than value.

Bonus

Type

Offer

Terms

More

Claim

Welcome Bonus

Welcome match + spins

Wagering, expiry, max bet, eligible games

Claim Bonus

OfferFirst-deposit match with possible free spins

TermsCheck wagering, expiry, max bet, and eligible games before claiming.

No Deposit Bonus

No-deposit bonus

Max cashout / expiry

Claim Bonus

OfferLow-risk no-deposit offer

TermsCheck max cashout limits and short expiry before claiming.

Free Spins

Free spins

Game, value, wagering, win cap

Claim Bonus

OfferExtra slot play with free spins

TermsCheck the selected game, spin value, wagering, and win cap before claiming.

Cashback

Cashback offer

Net losses, caps, timing

Claim Bonus

OfferCashback on net losses

TermsCheck cashback caps and timing before claiming.

Promo Code

Promo code bonus

Code Bonus

Claim Bonus

OfferExclusive 2026 promo code offers may unlock matched funds or spins, but the code must be entered correctly before deposit to qualify.

TermsCode must be entered correctly before deposit to qualify.

Reload Bonus

Reload bonus

Returning players, smaller match, fixed budgets

Claim Bonus

OfferReload bonus for returning players

TermsCheck the smaller match terms and fixed-budget details before claiming.

The table shows why reading terms matters more than reading headlines. A 100% match sounds strong, but 40x wagering, game exclusions, and tight time windows can sharply reduce real value.

• Typical activation flow after first deposit:
  • Deposit in the cashier using an eligible method.
  • Opt in, enter a promo code if required, or receive automatic credit.
  • Check the bonus wallet or account summary for locked funds.
  • Track wagering in the cashier, profile page, or promo area.
  • Complete rollover before requesting any withdrawal.
• Common mistakes to avoid:
  • Betting over the permitted maximum stake.
  • Using table or live games with weak contribution rates.
  • Ignoring expiry dates on spins or matched funds.
  • Trying to cash out too early.
• Best game types for clearing:
  • Standard video slots usually count the most.
  • Low-volatility slots can help preserve balance longer.
  • Blackjack and roulette often contribute little or nothing.

Players who want a wider market benchmark can compare current bonuses & promotions, check active promo codes, or browse current free spins offers before accepting any rollover-heavy package.

Games

Casino Lab historically presented itself as a full online casino, with slots, table games, and live dealer content forming the main catalogue. Exact game counts varied over time, and the supplied evidence does not provide a verified final number, so the clearest description is a fairly large offshore-style lobby typical of multi-brand operators before closure.

• 

  PlayDemo
• 

  PlayDemo
• 

  PlayDemo
• 

  PlayDemo
• 

  PlayDemo
• 

  PlayDemo

For Canadian players, the main appeal was likely variety rather than exclusivity. A broad game mix can mean enough choice for casual slot play, blackjack sessions, and live roulette, but it does not automatically mean better value. Clear RTP data, fair terms, and dependable withdrawals matter more.

• Main categories likely available:
  • Slots, including mainstream video slots and jackpot titles.
  • Classic table games such as blackjack, roulette, baccarat, and video poker.
  • Live casino tables, likely supplied through established studio partners.
• Titles and themes relevant to Canadian users:
  • Popular market tastes often include jackpot slots such as Mega Moolah.
  • High-interest staples include Book of Dead, Wolf Gold, and live dealer blackjack.
  • Holiday and campaign promotions reportedly referenced games such as Reactoonz.
• Provider transparency limits:
  • The source packet does not confirm a complete provider list.
  • No exclusive titles are verified in the materials.
  • Any claim of proprietary content should be treated carefully unless listed in official game lobbies.

RTP and fairness details matter more than raw game count. In a well-documented casino, slot RTP often ranges around 94% to 97%, while some table games can exceed that when played with optimal strategy. Players should normally find RTP in the game rules, help icon, or info screen. Independent testing names such as eCOGRA and iTech Labs are common industry references, but the provided Casino Lab research does not confirm a current, player-visible audit page.

The same caution applies to RNG certification and any provably fair claims. Provably fair systems use server seeds, client seeds, and hashes that players can verify independently. That model is more common in crypto casinos than in mainstream MGA-style brands. No supplied evidence confirms that Casino Lab offered a provably fair verification panel.

For live casino content, standard market practice is broad daily coverage, English-speaking dealers, and varying limits by table tier. Typical minimums can start around C$0.50 to C$5 for roulette or blackjack, while VIP tables rise much higher. Peak hours often follow evening traffic in Europe and North America, which can affect seat availability and queue times.

A realistic friction point is that game variety means little if account access, statements, or withdrawals become unreliable. Players interested in active alternatives can compare today's slots pages or review current mobile apps where game filtering and RTP visibility are clearer.

Pros and Cons

Casino Lab had traits that once appealed to Canadian players, especially those who wanted a CAD-facing casino with a broad game lobby and familiar promotions. At the same time, the brand also carried meaningful tradeoffs that became much harder to ignore once complaints around withdrawals and support escalated.

The appeal was easy to see during normal operation, but the weaknesses were serious enough to damage the overall player experience once things started going wrong.

• Pros
  • Broad casino positioning with slots, table games, and likely live dealer content.
  • Recognizable brand under a larger multi-brand group.
  • Historic appeal for Canadian players using CAD-facing payment options.
  • Promotions were easy to spot and designed for casual bonus seekers.
  • Simple lobby structure likely suited beginners.

• Cons
  • Bonus terms were not especially light, with 40x wagering noted in the research.
  • Some players dislike hidden conversion risk when CAD is processed through EUR back-end flows.
  • Support quality appeared to decline sharply during the final operating period.
  • Heavy bonus-led design can distract from the more important issue of withdrawal quality.
  • The brand is no longer suitable for active play due to closure and unresolved fund issues.

The main tradeoff is clear in practice. A wide game selection and visible promotions may look attractive at first, but those benefits lose value quickly if payment reliability weakens. That is why serious players usually compare cashier trust, complaint patterns, and account controls before they compare welcome offers.

• Best fit historically:
  • Casual casino users who prioritized variety and promotions.
  • Players comfortable reading terms and tracking wagering progress.
• Poor fit historically:
  • Users who wanted low-wagering bonus models.
  • Players who ranked fast, proven withdrawals above all else.

Anyone weighing old reputation against present reality should read the latest faq guidance and compare safer current brands through the main page rather than relying on legacy brand memory.

Payment Methods

For Canadian players, the cashier experience was always one of the most important parts of Casino Lab. The brand was associated with CAD play and local-friendly methods, especially Interac-style banking options, cards, and wallet channels commonly seen on offshore sites. The setup looked convenient, but it was also where problems showed up first when the operation came under stress.

The supplied research points to a major friction point during the final operating period. Some Interac e-Transfer withdrawals were reportedly marked as processed in the casino interface, yet funds never reached Gigadat-linked rails or players' bank accounts. That gap between on-screen status and actual settlement is highly material for Canadians, because Interac is trusted precisely for its clarity and speed.

The payment picture matters because the difference between "approved," "processed," and "settled" is where many disputes begin. A cashier can look functional on the front end while the actual payout rail is failing behind the scenes.

• Practical points for Canadian users:
  • Interac e-Transfer is usually the gold standard for local trust.
  • Cards can be less reliable because some banks block gambling transactions.
  • Wallets can reduce bank friction, but they do not solve operator solvency risk.
• Common causes of delay or denial:
  • KYC checks started only at withdrawal stage.
  • Name mismatches between account and payment method.
  • Requests for source-of-funds documents.
  • Weekend or holiday processing backlogs.
  • Operator-side liquidity problems.
• Wagering and withdrawal restrictions:
  • Bonus-linked balances usually cannot be withdrawn until rollover is completed.
  • Some operators require deposits to be wagered before withdrawal as an anti-fraud control.
  • The source packet does not verify a separate fixed deposit-wager rule for Casino Lab beyond bonus play conditions.

Canadian tax treatment is generally straightforward for recreational players. Gambling winnings are usually tax-free windfalls in Canada, though professional gambling cases can be treated differently. Players should keep their own records because platform access, account history, and statements may disappear if a site closes. That is one reason reliable account exports and transaction logs matter more than many users realize.

For current market comparisons, readers can review updated payment methods and practical withdrawal guides before using any offshore cashier that lacks strong settlement transparency.

Security and Licensing

For Canadian players, security at an online casino comes down to how identity checks are handled, whether payments are processed properly, how fraud is prevented, and what happens to personal data if the operator enters distress.

The historical record around Casino Lab shows that trust concerns expanded beyond normal support frustration. Major review platforms later reflected severe complaints, and the parent company entered formal liquidation. Even if a site originally offered standard account protections, those protections become far less meaningful once account access, statements, and withdrawal processing break down.

• Technical safeguards players would normally expect:
  • TLS-secured website sessions, commonly TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3 in modern environments.
  • Password-protected accounts and session management controls.
  • Anti-fraud monitoring for duplicate accounts, payment abuse, and suspicious geolocation.
  • KYC and AML review before or during withdrawal processing.
• KYC and AML levels typically used in this market:
  • Basic review: name, date of birth, address, and identity confirmation.
  • Standard review: photo ID plus proof of address.
  • Enhanced review: payment method proof, source-of-funds, and selfie verification.
• Common document requests:
  • Passport or driver's licence.
  • Utility bill or bank statement.
  • Masked card image or payment confirmation screenshot.
  • Interac-linked banking evidence where relevant.
• Common rejection reasons:
  • Blurred documents.
  • Name mismatch.
  • Expired identification.
  • Address inconsistency.
  • Use of third-party payment methods.

The real friction point is that KYC can be a valid compliance tool or a stalling mechanism, depending on operator behaviour. The complaint timeline in the research suggests verification requests became part of withdrawal friction during the final months. That distinction matters because a legitimate document check should resolve a payout issue, not freeze it indefinitely.

• Country and access controls:
  • Operators typically restrict access from prohibited jurisdictions.
  • VPN or proxy use usually breaches terms and can lead to voided winnings or closure.
  • IP checks, device fingerprinting, and geolocation are standard anti-fraud tools.
• Minimum age for Canadian players:
  • 19+ in most provinces.
  • 18+ in Quebec, Alberta, and Manitoba.
• Important site documents to review:
  • terms & conditions
  • privacy policy
  • responsible gaming
  • bonus offers and linked conditions

Another security issue remains relevant after closure: data exposure. Reports cited in the research suggest former players received targeted phishing messages from fake recovery agencies. That means account safety extends beyond active gameplay. Former users should treat any unsolicited refund offer, especially one asking for crypto up front, as high-risk.

Brand, Operator, and Licensing

Casino Lab should be understood through its corporate structure, because ownership and operating responsibility often explain how payments, support, and disputes are handled. The research data identifies Genesis Global Limited as the parent company connected to the brand. The materials supplied for this page do not verify the instruction that the casino is operated by Ellipse Entertainment Limited, so that name must be presented as unverified within this evidence set.

That distinction matters. A player may see one brand on the front end, another legal entity in the terms, and separate processing arrangements behind the scenes. When a dispute appears, the exact legal entity becomes the difference between a routine complaint and a long recovery process.

• Verified and best-available corporate summary:
  • Brand: Casino Lab
  • Review context: betlab-ca.com
  • Parent company: Genesis Global Limited
  • Operator company: N/A in supplied contact data
  • Instructional operator name provided in prompt: Ellipse Entertainment Limited
  • Status of that operator claim in evidence packet: N/A / not independently supported here
• Corporate registration fields:
  • Full legal name: Genesis Global Limited
  • Country of incorporation: Malta-linked regulatory context referenced
  • Registered address: N/A in supplied contact data
  • Legal representative: N/A
  • RFC: N/A, not applicable to Canada-focused context here
  • Brand ownership details: N/A beyond parent-company reference
  • Payment processing entity: N/A in supplied contact data

The source material also references an MGA B2C licence, specifically MGA/B2C/314/2015, and notes that it was suspended in January 2023. In plain terms, the brand's historical licensing context was tied to Malta, and later enforcement action materially changed its standing.

• Licensing and group context:
  • Historical regulatory jurisdiction: Malta Gaming Authority context referenced in source data.
  • Licence reference mentioned: MGA/B2C/314/2015.
  • Official enforcement context: Malta Gaming Authority regulatory register, as referenced in source materials.
  • Related brands mentioned by users: Casino Joy and Spinit.
  • Ultimate beneficial owners: N/A in supplied public packet.
• Responsibility chain in practice:
  • The brand front end markets the casino to players.
  • The operating entity handles terms, account rules, and withdrawal liability.
  • The parent group can influence treasury, staffing, and risk exposure across brands.

The practical takeaway is that brand familiarity does not equal legal clarity. Before depositing at any casino, players should verify the named operator in the footer, compare it with the terms page, and review the latest public complaint record. That process is often more useful than reading promotional copy alone.

Mobile Casino

Casino Lab was aimed at online players in a market where mobile use dominates, so a responsive mobile site would have been essential even without a fully documented native app. For most Canadian users, the question is not whether a casino can open on a phone, but whether the mobile experience preserves the important things: login stability, cashier visibility, game filtering, and account controls.

The supplied research does not confirm official iOS or Android app links for Casino Lab. The safer assumption is a browser-based mobile experience rather than a verified native app download. In many offshore casino setups, that is normal. It can work well for slots and quick deposits, but it is usually weaker for deeper account management and document uploads.

• Likely mobile strengths during operation:
  • Access through standard mobile browsers on iPhone and Android.
  • Simple navigation for slots, tables, and promotions.
  • Fast account access for casual sessions.
• Likely mobile pain points:
  • KYC uploads can be harder on mobile than on desktop.
  • Bonus terms and cashier details are often harder to read on a small screen.
  • If support tools fail, mobile users have fewer easy workarounds.
• What players should check on any mobile casino:
  • Whether the login area is stable.
  • Whether transaction history is visible.
  • Whether limits and self-exclusion settings are accessible.
  • Whether browser play supports the same game catalogue as desktop.

The real decision point is convenience versus control. A mobile casino can be perfect for a quick slot session on the go, but desktop is often better for reading terms, uploading verification files, and documenting disputes. That tradeoff matters even more when a brand has support or withdrawal friction.

Because Casino Lab is no longer an active recommendation, readers looking for live alternatives should compare verified mobile apps, review current login guidance, and use platforms with clearer mobile account-management tools.

Customer Support

Customer support is where a casino proves whether its promises hold up under pressure. A site can have attractive games and bonuses, but once withdrawals, verification, or technical errors appear, support quality becomes the real test.

In the Casino Lab case, the complaint record is especially important. The source material states that players later reported unresponsive support, disabled live chat, bounced emails, and silent VIP account managers. Those patterns are not minor service issues. They are operational red flags, especially when they happen at the same time as delayed withdrawals.

• Known and claimed support channels:
  • Email support was used historically by players.
  • Live chat reportedly became unavailable in the final period.
  • VIP players said account managers stopped replying via WhatsApp and email.
  • Phone support is not specified in the supplied contact data.
• Best-available contact record:
  • Email: [email protected]
  • Status: needs clarification in supplied data
  • Purpose: support
  • Phone: not specified
  • Contact form: not specified

This support profile matters because response time is not just a convenience metric. When a casino stops answering, players lose access to verification progress, complaint tracking, and account evidence.

• What players should expect from good support elsewhere:
  • 24/7 live chat for urgent account issues.
  • Clear ticket numbers by email.
  • Transparent escalation routes for payment complaints.
  • Named timeframes for KYC review and withdrawals.
• What to document in a dispute:
  • Payment receipts.
  • Withdrawal request timestamps.
  • Chat screenshots.
  • Email headers and bounce notices.
  • Bonus and verification terms in force at the time.

Players comparing alternatives should place support quality near the top of the checklist, especially when reading current faq guidance or reviewing a casino's latest complaint profile.

Responsible Gambling Tools

Responsible gambling tools are useful only if players can access them quickly and if the operator applies them consistently. Casino Lab historically appears to have offered standard account controls such as deposit limits and cooling-off options, which was common for MGA-facing casinos. The problem is that these tools lose practical value when a site becomes unstable or goes offline.

That issue is especially relevant in Canada, where many players outside Ontario have historically relied on offshore operators. According to the Malta Gaming Authority's player protection publications referenced in the research, responsible gambling controls form part of broader consumer safeguards. Still, no tool can fully protect a player if the operator's solvency collapses. Casino games are not a way to earn money. They are entertainment with real risk and potentially irreversible expense.

The checklist shows a basic responsible gambling framework, but access is the key issue in practice. If statements, exclusions, or reminders disappear when a platform goes dark, the tool exists on paper but not in the player's real life.

• How these tools are normally activated:
  • Open account settings and choose limits for deposits, losses, or time.
  • Contact support for longer breaks or permanent self-exclusion.
  • Review transaction history regularly.
  • Set limits before playing, not after losses start to build.
• Warning signs that gambling is becoming harmful:
  • Chasing losses.
  • Borrowing money to play.
  • Hiding gambling from family or friends.
  • Playing to escape stress.
  • Ignoring work, study, or sleep because of gambling.

Support contacts:

• Local help in Canada: ConnexOntario, 1-866-531-2600, available 24/7 for Ontario. Also see connexontario.ca.
• Additional Canadian resources: PlaySmart and GameSense provide practical education tools.
• International support: GamCare (+44 0808 8020 133), BeGambleAware, Gamblers Anonymous, Gambling Therapy 24/7 online chat, National Council on Problem Gambling (1-800-522-4700).

For practical self-help information, consult the site's responsible gaming page and use local helplines first. Immediate support matters more than any bonus or VIP perk.

Complaints and Dispute Resolution

Complaints are one of the clearest ways to measure how a casino behaves when something goes wrong. In Casino Lab's case, the public complaint profile became a major part of the story, especially for Canadian players who reported delayed or unpaid withdrawals during the final operating period.

The research packet points to a serious deterioration across review and complaint platforms. Trustpilot was cited at 1.2 out of 5, with most recent complaints centred on missing withdrawals and unresponsive support. AskGamblers and Casino.guru were both described as having blacklisted or marked the brand as closed. Casino.guru complaint records referenced in the packet also pointed to unresolved Canadian disputes totaling more than C$120,000. Those figures may be dated, but the pattern is still highly relevant.

• Typical complaint process at an online casino:
  • Submit a written complaint to support with account details and evidence.
  • Wait for internal review and ticket escalation.
  • If unresolved, escalate to the relevant regulator or approved dispute body.
  • Keep all screenshots, payment records, and terms captured at the time.
• Escalation routes commonly used in the industry:
  • Regulator complaint units.
  • ADR bodies where available.
  • Public complaint forums such as Casino.guru or AskGamblers.
  • Card issuer disputes or chargeback requests where eligible.

The major friction point here is time. A routine payment complaint may resolve in days at a healthy casino, but insolvency-related disputes can last months or years. That is why unresolved complaint volume matters more than a few isolated negative reviews.

This pattern matters because it suggests a systemic issue rather than a few bad service cases. When complaints repeat the same facts across payment, support, and verification, players should assume the risk is structural.

• Best steps for affected Canadian players:
  • File a complaint with the Malta Gaming Authority Player Hub.
  • Ask your bank or card issuer about chargeback rights if the deposit window is still open.
  • Do not pay private recovery agents asking for crypto or upfront fees.
  • Preserve all records, including balance screenshots and marketing emails.

Players comparing current operators should treat complaint resolution as a core product feature, not an afterthought. A smooth casino is one that pays and answers, not one that only markets well.

Conclusion

Casino Lab once appealed to Canadian players through a familiar casino format, CAD-facing usability, and a broad game-led presentation. Those points may have helped with first impressions, but they no longer outweigh the documented problems around complaints, payment friction, support collapse, and formal liquidation context tied to the parent company.

From a practical 2026 viewpoint, Casino Lab should not be chosen for active play. The stronger lesson for readers is broader: bonus size, game count, and slick design matter less than clear ownership, payment integrity, and dependable player protection. Ontario's regulated market has made that difference easier to see, while players in the rest of Canada still need to scrutinize offshore brands carefully.

Methodology & Trust. Our review process uses multi-source verification, regulator and public-record checks, complaint-platform analysis, community feedback screening, and regular updates when material changes affect player risk. We also compare operator claims against practical player issues such as withdrawal timing, KYC friction, complaint handling, and responsible gambling access. Where a data point is unclear, we label it cautiously rather than filling gaps with marketing assumptions.

Affiliation Notice. Some pages on this site may contain referral links. That does not change our editorial approach. Recommendations and warnings are based on research, complaint patterns, market context, and decision usefulness for readers, not on headline commission value.

Last updated: 24.04.2026
Updated: 24.04.2026 - refreshed closure status, complaints context, and Canadian recovery guidance.
Updated: 06.11.2025 - aligned brand contact notes and operator data fields with available public context.
Updated: 21.09.2024 - added bonus analysis and payment method details.

FAQ

Is Casino Lab legal and safe for Canadian players?

For practical player safety, Casino Lab should not be treated as a suitable active option in 2026. The key issue is not marketing status, but the documented pattern of unpaid withdrawals, unresolved complaints, support failure, and liquidation context connected to Genesis Global Limited. Canadian players should use extra caution with any email, mirror page, or message claiming the brand has returned.

What verification documents could Casino Lab request?

Like many online casinos, Casino Lab could request photo ID, proof of address, and payment-method evidence before processing withdrawals. In normal circumstances, that is standard KYC practice. The concern raised in the complaint record is that verification appeared to become part of prolonged payout friction during the final operating period, which is why players should always save copies of submitted documents and dated communication.

What were the bonus conditions at Casino Lab?

The research points to a 40x wagering requirement as a key part of Casino Lab's historical bonus model. That means bonus money and often bonus-linked winnings had to be wagered many times before withdrawal. Players also needed to watch expiry periods, excluded games, and maximum bet limits. If those conditions were not met, bonus balances and associated winnings could usually be removed.

Can Canadian players recover money from Casino Lab?

Recovery may still be attempted, but expectations should remain modest. Affected players can file through the Malta Gaming Authority Player Hub and ask their bank or card issuer about any chargeback route for eligible deposits. Interac transactions are often harder to reverse. Do not pay third-party recovery services asking for upfront fees, especially by crypto, because targeted follow-up scams were reported after the shutdown.