Complaints about of Evolution AB games on unlicensed websites

Request

I would like to have a list of all of the complaints received in 2024 and year to date 2025 about the presence of Evolution AB games on unlicensed websites in the UK (its brands are: Evolution, Red Tiger, NetEnt and Ezugi).

If a list of all complaints cannot be provided, I would like to know the number of complaints received in 2024 and year to date 2025 about the presence of Evolution AB games on unlicensed websites in the UK (its brands are: Evolution, Red Tiger, NetEnt and Ezugi).

Response

Thank you for your request which has been processed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

In your email you have requested a list of all of the complaints received in 2024 and year to date 2025 about the presence of Evolution AB games on unlicensed websites in the UK.

Firstly, it should be noted that the Gambling Commission is an industry regulator and not an ombudsman. Our role is to consider if a gambling business has breached their licence conditions and we will take regulatory action where appropriate.

We do not become involved in or “act upon” individual complaints.

We use evidence from a range of places, including from gambling customers, to build cases against gambling businesses. Information provided to us helps inform our work to raise gambling industry standards and make gambling fairer and safer. Information drawn from complaints raised against operators may be used by the Commission to inform our regulatory approach and determine whether any action may be necessary.

If we have sufficient information about an issue with an operator that we feel needs to be pursued, we will commence a dialogue with the operator.

The Commission is a regulatory body with licensing, compliance and enforcement functions. Through our regulatory activity, the Commission aims to protect consumers and the wider public, and to raise standards in the gambling industry.

We release details of our enforcement activity through public statements. These public statements will detail the nature of the failings by the operator and the amount of the fine or settlement. Further to this, the Commission also publishes a list of recent regulatory sanctions we have imposed on licence holders.

The Gambling Commission do not provide comment on any information held regarding specific operators unless it is in the public interest to do so. As such, we are unable to confirm or deny whether we hold any information within the scope of your request.

Section 31(3) of the FOIA (Law Enforcement) exemption applies.

Section 31

Section 31(3) provides that the duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that compliance with section 1(1)(a) would or would be likely to, prejudice any of the matters mentioned in subsection (1).

Public interest test

Having acknowledged that the Commission is not able to confirm or deny whether we hold any information within the scope of your request; section 31 of the FOIA requires that we consider a public interest test to identify whether there is a wider public interest in fulfilling this request as opposed to maintaining the exemption.

Arguments in favour of disclosure

• The Commission is a public body which is required to regulate the gambling industry in the public interest. There is therefore a public interest in members of the public having confidence that the Commission is being open and honest with the information it holds so that it can be held to account.
• It is important that the public are assured that the Commission is carrying out its functions in ensuring that any individuals or organisations who are involved in providing gambling facilities to the public have undergone the necessary assessments and will uphold the licencing objectives ensuring that consumers are protected.
• Disclosure of the requested information could demonstrate to stakeholders and relevant parties how the Commission is assessing licensees and, furthermore, this disclosure may encourage stakeholders to work with us and contribute to our programme of work, increasing confidence in the Commission as a regulator and its ability to uphold the law.

Arguments in favour of maintaining the exemption

• Confirming or denying information which makes specific individuals or events identifiable could alert individuals involved to the fact that the Commission was/is or alternatively wasn’t/isn’t investigating a particular case and provide them with an opportunity to alter their behaviours or evade detection. This would result in making it more difficult for the Commission to achieve its regulatory aims.
• Further to this, simply confirming or denying this request for information would impact on the openness of stakeholders when sharing important information with us or other law enforcement agencies.
• The amount of information released is carefully considered in order to protect the integrity of investigations and individuals or operators from being unfairly associated with unsubstantiated allegations.
• Finally, only once or if a formal regulatory decision has been made or there is agreement of a regulatory settlement the Commission will ordinarily publish all such decisions in full. Fulfilling this request may prejudice the outcome of any future investigation by the Commission, or another body, to the detriment of the public interest.

Weighing the balance

Given the points considered, the Commission believes that the interests of the public are better served through maintaining the exemption, therefore we are not in a position to confirm or deny whether we hold any information in relation to your request.

Review of the decision

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your Freedom of Information request you are entitled to an internal review of our decision. You should write to FOI Team, Gambling Commission, 4th floor, Victoria Square House, Victoria Square, Birmingham, B2 4BP or by reply to this email. 

Please note, internal review requests should be made within 40 working days of the initial response. Requests made outside this timeframe will not be processed.

If you are not content with the outcome of our review, you may then apply directly to the Information Commissioner (ICO) for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have already exhausted the review procedure provided by the Gambling Commission. 

It should be noted that if you wish to raise a complaint with the ICO about the Commission’s handling of your request for information, then you are required to do so within six weeks of receiving your final response or last substantive contact with us.

The ICO can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office (opens in a new tab), Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Information Management Team
Gambling Commission