Cookies on the Gambling Commission website

The Gambling Commission website uses cookies to make the site work better for you. Some of these cookies are essential to how the site functions and others are optional. Optional cookies help us remember your settings, measure your use of the site and personalise how we communicate with you. Any data collected is anonymised and we do not set optional cookies unless you consent.

Set cookie preferences

You've accepted all cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Skip to main content

Dispute resolution

The issues in this guidance have been the cause of disputes between consumers and licensees. If a consumer is not satisfied with your response to their complaint, they can refer it to an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) provider. We have become aware of obstructive behaviour when providers attempt to adjudicate on disputes of this nature. Examples include claims from licensees that:

  • a recent assessment by Gambling Commission Compliance staff did not identify any concerns with licensees’ terms, and therefore we have ‘approved’ them, the licensee’s terms
  • they were not a company that agreed undertakings with the CMA, and therefore their own terms must be satisfactory.

Neither of these are correct.

Compliance assessments vary in scope and may focus on a specific aspect of your business where we have concerns. Commission staff do not ‘approve’ terms and conditions as part of their work.

Our letter to the sector made clear that all gambling companies need to comply with the requirements set out in the published undertakings, not just those companies that agreed to them.

You should therefore follow our guidance when interacting with ADR providers, and supply any information requested within the specified timescales

Previous page
Terms that allow winnings on open bets to be reduced
Next page
Glossary of terms
Is this page useful?
Back to top