Licensee compliance with crime prevention requirements
This data represents a ‘snapshot’ of licensee compliance with our regulations according to our most recent licensee assessments. The first table contains data drawn from full assessments. A full assessment looks at all aspects of a licensee’s compliance with the regulations, whereas a targeted assessment focuses on specific elements of compliance which may differ in each assessment and so are not directly comparable.
The aim of our regulatory activity is to ensure licensees are operating in a way which is consistent with the licensing objectives. This means assessing compliance with licensing requirements and addressing instances of non-compliance. You can read more about our approach to compliance and enforcement activity in our Licensing, Compliance and Enforcement Policy Statement.
We are a risk-based regulator, and so we undertake compliance assessments where the potential risk to consumers may be greatest. As a result of this we do not expect to see full compliance in these assessments, and this data cannot be taken to represent levels of compliance across the whole of the gambling industry. These results relate to assessments of individual licensed activities, which means that data may be skewed where our assessment activity has focused on a gambling entity that holds a number of different licences, as a single failing may impact multiple licences held.
Assessments of licensee compliance with crime prevention requirements April 2025 to March 2026 - full assessments only
| Assessment outcome | Good (percentage) | Satisfactory (some improvement required) (percentage) | Special measures (percentage) | Significant failings (percentage) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| April 2025 to June 2025 | 76.2% | 9.5% | 4.8% | 9.5% |
| Cumulative year to date | 76.2% | 9.5% | 4.8% | 9.5% |
Assessments of licensee compliance with crime prevention requirements April 2024 to March 2025 - full assessments only
| Assessment outcome | Good (percentage) | Satisfactory (some improvement required) (percentage) | Special measures (percentage) | Significant failings (percentage) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| April 2024 to June 2024 | 35.3% | 11.8% | 11.8% | 41.2% |
| July 2024 to September 2024 | 37.5% | 37.5% | 0.0% | 25.0% |
| October 2024 to December 2024 | 25.0% | 50.0% | 10.0% | 15.0% |
| January 2025 to March 2025 | 46.0% | 50.0% | 0.0% | 4.0% |
| Cumulative year to date | 36.6% | 39.4% | 5.6% | 18.3% |
Depending on the findings of our initial assessment a licensee may be subject to follow up activity. For example:
Issued with an improvement notice
An improvement notice may be considered appropriate in a case where the licence breach or risk to the licensing objectives is considered to be isolated and there is evidence the licensee will make improvements and address these issues immediately so that the impacts are contained and limited. An improvement notice requires the licensee to provide assurance that the identified issue have been adequately addressed.
Moved into a special measures process, with a later reassessment
A special measures process may be considered where the identified issue is more serious. A licensee must agree and submit an urgent action plan to address the issue within a set time. The licensee will then be subject to a reassessment to ensure the issue has been satisfactorily resolved. Use of special measures does not prevent the Gambling Commission deciding to commence a formal regulatory investigation. It is used where appropriate to deliver swifter action being taken for the benefit of consumers than more formal regulatory action.
Referred to our Enforcement team to consider a formal regulatory investigation
Enforcement activity is appropriate when one or more issues are assessed as posing an increased, significant or ongoing risk to consumers, including from repeat issues or where a licensee is deemed unlikely to be able to perform the licensed activities.
Follow up activity cannot be broken down by licensing objective at this stage, so the figures in the following tables are duplicated in each of the areas of compliance activity that we report on within the impact metrics.
Outcomes where licensees have been referred to special measures for any failing since April 2025
| Reassessment outcome | Now compliant (percentage) | Non-compliant and escalated (percentage) | Licensees pending reassessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| April 2025 to June 2025 | 100.0% | 0.0% | 3 |
Outcomes where licensees have been issued with an improvement notice for any failing since April 2025
| Reassessment outcome | Now compliant (percentage) | Non-compliant and escalated (percentage) | Licensees pending reassessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| April 2025 to June 2025 | 100.0% | 0.0% | 6 |
Outcomes where licensees have been referred to special measures for any failing between April 2024 to March 2025
| Reassessment outcome | Now compliant (percentage) | Non-compliant and escalated (percentage) | Licensees pending reassessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| April 2024 to March 2025 | 100.0% | 0.0% | 0 |
Outcomes where licensees have been issued with an improvement notice for any failing between April 2024 to March 2025
| Reassessment outcome | Now compliant (percentage) | Non-compliant and escalated (percentage) | Licensees pending reassessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| April 2024 to March 2025 | 88.9% | 11.1% | 0 |
We are exploring how to reflect the impact of our enforcement casework within our impact metrics. In the meantime we report on the outcomes of our casework individually as each case is resolved.